Manchester Airport - General Thread


Advertisement


EGCC_MAN

Premium Member+
Subscriber
Feb 2, 2016
587
193
I doubt anyone that isn't a MAN "fan" or "frequenter" would call it inappropriate
Well I think it is safe to assume that we're all aviation enthusiasts on here. But, seriously, any notion of what "fans", "frequenters", "supporters" etc may be affronted by in relation to airports competing for business with each other in the real world is entirely irrelevant. When negotiating a contract with a potential new operator, I can assure you that no airport executive will be concerned about the reaction of spotters if Airport A wins new business which Airport B also tendered for. The world of business has no place for such sentimentality.

Competition is great however surely it doesn't matter to MAG which airport has the freight and which has the most passengers as long as all three MAG airports are successful in there own right
I think you express MAG's point of view very succinctly. By carving up the business in a way which suits them they can reduce overall investment and operate more in the way one would expect from a cartel. Unfortunately, this risks interpretation as anti-competitive behaviour and that can ultimately trigger an investigation into abuse of monopoly power over a market.

Whilst I agree with you that MAG's immediate interests lie with maximising profit by ensuring that their divisions do not compete too robustly with each other, there are wider implications to consider. An airport is a key amenity which provides essential services to other businesses across its region. It is incumbent upon the airport operator to provide the most comprehensive range of services it can reasonably support on behalf of the region it serves. Economic development within the surrounding catchment area depends on this. And in the case of MAN - which benefits arguably more than any other entity from the Northern Powerhouse partnership - it is particularly important that the airport is seen to 'do its bit'. In the realms of cargo, some observers would argue that MAN has fallen well short in this regard, perhaps out of desire to promote investment at EMA to the benefit of MAG but not the NW region. Would that constitute monopolistic behaviour? It is in MAG's interests to promote transparent and robust competition between their neighbouring airports across all sectors, or a day may come when a regulator orders them to dispose of an asset which they would rather retain.

EMA far better placed to serve a large area of the country more successfully than Manchester can
Geographically, EMA is very well located to service a large area of the Midlands and the M1 corridor. But that doesn't mean there is no role for MAN. NW England is a densely urbanised manufacturing region which is home to many leading exporters and importers in its own right. MAN has a responsibility to provide the level of facilities these customers deserve, or to step aside in favour of an operator which is able to do so. Perhaps MAG should consider contracting out cargo marketing at MAN given the clear conflict of interest in promoting stablemate EMA to the detriment of the NW economy.
 

Seasider

Premium Member+
Subscriber
Jan 16, 2009
2,156
293
East Coast
What hasn't been commented on is the ease of access to the NW from EMA. The A50/M6 means most of the NW can be reached within 2 hours. As previously said, time is not always the important factor. Keep the facilities at EMA for pure cargo and MAN for hold cargo, or is that too simplistic.
 

EGCC_MAN

Premium Member+
Subscriber
Feb 2, 2016
587
193
Well, since you asked ... YES, that is too simplistic. For the reasons outlined in earlier postings.

Journey times from another region are still longer than journey times within a region. And, of course, road journey times are bi-directional. They apply the other way around as well.
 

Seasider

Premium Member+
Subscriber
Jan 16, 2009
2,156
293
East Coast
EGCC - I think we are going to have to agree to disagree on this. I have no experience whatsover in operating an airport, but I don't think MAN Group will be seeking DHL, UPS and all the other pure cargo carriers (who have invested heavily in infrastructure) to move their operations to MAN. There is no gain for the Group in doing this. Now if EMA was owned by someone else, that's a different story.
 

EGCC_MAN

Premium Member+
Subscriber
Feb 2, 2016
587
193
I concur that we have reached the stage where we must agree to disagree and move on. Though just to clear up one point: my postings have not suggested relocation of established DHL and UPS hubs to MAN. That is wholly unrealistic and it makes no sense for operators to abandon that infrastructure. More feasible would be restoration of a couple of nightly DHL 'spoke' departures to continental European hubs (as used to happen for a while), similar in scale to MAN's existing FedEx operation. This was originally stated as the plan when DHL constructed a warehouse at Airport City. I'm more keen to see MAN facilitate general cargo operations (as distinct from the overnight parcels specialists).
 

IanFarquharson

Platinum Member
Jul 23, 2015
1,703
150
59
Balsall Common
bhxmovements..co.uk
I concur that we have reached the stage where we must agree to disagree and move on. Though just to clear up one point: my postings have not suggested relocation of established DHL and UPS hubs to MAN. That is wholly unrealistic and it makes no sense for operators to abandon that infrastructure. More feasible would be restoration of a couple of nightly DHL 'spoke' departures to continental European hubs (as used to happen for a while), similar in scale to MAN's existing FedEx operation. This was originally stated as the plan when DHL constructed a warehouse at Airport City. I'm more keen to see MAN facilitate general cargo operations (as distinct from the overnight parcels specialists).
The DHL facility at EMA has almost doubled in size in recent years, so MAG making plenty of money out of EMA :)
 

EGCC_MAN

Premium Member+
Subscriber
Feb 2, 2016
587
193
The DHL facility at EMA has almost doubled in size in recent years, so MAG making plenty of money out of EMA :)
Well that has never been in dispute. The debate has never questioned that MAG's bottom line benefits from what appear to be restrictive practices in the cargo market. The losers from this are businesses in the NW, the Northern Powerhouse project and the regional economy.
 

LS@MAN

Active Member
Feb 20, 2018
137
28
UK
I was travelling to France on business Sunday morning, so as I was staying in a hotel Saturday night near the airport, I managed to walk over to T2X drop off area and have a look through the windows of the arrivals and departures areas. Looks very impressive, still some small things to be done but that only includes tidying up and re-arranging the equipment inside. The airport looks and feels even bigger with the extended drop off area and T2X, very modern feel walking around especially in the arrivals level where the buses are parked, more of a european airport feel, I personally think it looks very smart and bright. Looking forward to it finally opening!
Whilst I was in that area, I also took the opportunity to walk to the T2 new multi-story car park and take the lift up to the top, to an empty car park and plenty of grounded aircraft below, a very sad sight see, especially the beloved Virgin 747's.
I noticed the new 900 series stands (10 in total 901-919) have been completed, with ground markings & equipment and safedock systems also in place. Everything looks good, except there are no aircraft to park there.

The airfield is by no means full, so is there a possibility of parking the TUI 737 Max over there and re-opening the taxiway outside of the airport pub?
There are 3 Virgin 747's and 2 Flybe A/C on the airfield at the moment, as much as it'll be sad to see them make their final departure, is there any sign of them leaving and freeing up those stands?
I assume that'll happen before the 3X A330 Thomas Cook's actually go?!

Went through T1 around 9.30am on Sunday morning, no real issues. Pretty quiet within the terminal, security was a breeze as expected with few departures at that time. Departure areas quiet again, but enough shops open.
Boarded a Lufthansa MRJ900 at gate 7 from pier B...the sooner they get rid of this ancient thing the better!
It was a full flight to Munich, quite surprised Lufthansa hadn't allocated an A319/320 to this service (notice it's an MRJ900 quite often at the moment).

And finally, at my final destination airport, there were signs offering FREE COVID-19 tests! Take note Bojo and the UK government!!

Stay safe and healthy everyone!
 

Scottie Dog

Moderator
Staff member
Subscriber
Sep 7, 2016
2,580
310
70
Warrington
Very many thanks #LS@MAN for a great report, both of the T2X and also your observations on T1 and the Lufthansa flight.

Totally agree with your closing comment!!
 

Manchester Exile

New Member
Feb 17, 2020
2
1
49
Brisbane
#LS@MAN, I believe that Pier B is going to remain and become part of the expanded T2. So passengers could face a long walk to their aircraft, checking in at T2 then having to make their way to pier B to board. Hopefully travelators will be installed (and switched on!) to make the walk less taxing.

I haven't heard anything about Pier B getting refurbished as part of the project, but one would hope that it is refreshed. It's now nearly 60 years old. Does anyone have any information on this?
 

marni1971

Well-Known Member
Nov 21, 2017
196
73
48
Manchester
There’s been various plans for pier B (and terminal one in general) ranging from do nothing to renovate (really?!) to demo and rebuild. I saw art a while ago for a snazzy two story version when the 380 was proposed to use it. Even less chance of that happening now I assume.

Interestingly the east side extension to B (the Lufthansa Superhub) only had a designed life of 10-15 years when it opened in 1995/6.
 

Jamman

Premium Member
Subscriber
Oct 31, 2017
45
118
40
Wakefield
There’s been various plans for pier B (and terminal one in general) ranging from do nothing to renovate (really?!) to demo and rebuild. I saw art a while ago for a snazzy two story version when the 380 was proposed to use it. Even less chance of that happening now I assume.

Interestingly the east side extension to B (the Lufthansa Superhub) only had a designed life of 10-15 years when it opened in 1995/6.
What in the bejezus is a Lufthansa Superhub?

EDIT: I found this article https://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/news/6197909.airport-75m-superhub-speeds-the-way/ I must have missed this when I was 15 knowing that it had anything to do with Lufthansa.
 

Scottie Dog

Moderator
Staff member
Subscriber
Sep 7, 2016
2,580
310
70
Warrington
Airports group banks £340m from sale of non-core property portfolio


Manchester Airports Group has sold more than £340m of non-core property assets to reinvest in its three airports: Manchester, East Midlands and London Stansted.

It has disposed of its property portfolio to international investment group Columbia Threadneedle Investments.

Manchester Airport Group Investments Limited (MAGIL) announced this afternoon that it had entered into an agreement to sell its entire shareholding in MAG Investment Assets Limited (MAGIAL) to Columbia.

MAGIAL owns a non-core property portfolio situated on and around the sites of Manchester, East Midlands and London Stansted Airports.

As part of the same transaction, Airport City (Manchester) Ltd, a subsidiary of MAGIL’s ultimate parent Manchester Airport Holdings Limited, sold a 50% stake in its investment in the Airport City Manchester development, retaining a 20% interest.

As at March 31, 2020, MAGIL had net assets held for sale of £370.1m and generated £28.9m of rental revenue in the 12 months ended March 31, 2020, representing 3.2% of total revenue across the MAGIL Group.

This transaction accounts for 86% of the £28.9m revenue element of assets held for sale.

The net combined proceeds, after fees and expenses, were in excess of £340m.

The remaining non-core property assets are subject to a separate disposal strategy.

Manchester Airports Group chief executive, Charlie Cornish, said: “Realising value from our non-core property portfolio to invest in our core growth areas has been a key component of our growth strategy for a number of years.

“The current process began prior to the impact of COVID-19 and we are pleased to complete this sale, despite these challenging circumstances, complementing MAG’s financial response to COVID-19.”

He added: “We wish the new owners every success and are confident that the property portfolio and development interests will continue to flourish and support the local economy as we focus on continued growth at Manchester, London Stansted and East Midlands airports.”
 

LS@MAN

Active Member
Feb 20, 2018
137
28
UK
There’s been various plans for pier B (and terminal one in general) ranging from do nothing to renovate (really?!) to demo and rebuild. I saw art a while ago for a snazzy two story version when the 380 was proposed to use it. Even less chance of that happening now I assume.

Interestingly the east side extension to B (the Lufthansa Superhub) only had a designed life of 10-15 years when it opened in 1995/6.
It needs to go surly?! I know it would cost to perform a demolition, but would be worth it in the long term with the new T2X and current T3, from a capacity perspective there would be enough room without it? Pier 2 would open at the same time as T2X as well.
 
Top Bottom