Big front-page article on the local newspaper that circulates around LGW, stating that Ferrovial are strongly considering the sale of LGW to private ownership!:eek:
I think it is a good idea to be honest because they will keep LHR for the long-haul services and STN can then grow into an even bigger low-cost hub…
Does anyone think this is a good/bad move?
By: Arabella-Cox - 29th August 2007 at 16:49
Can we have GLA sold next please?:D
By: alertken - 29th August 2007 at 09:55
BAA put itself “in play” in 2003 as owner of Fortess LHR, coloniser of lesser ports. It faced: 1. long, heavy debt (T5, then T1-4 rework), 2. unpredictability of the net effect of “Open Skies” on LHR, 3. distressed sale of some assets if the Monopolies and Mergers Commission imposed breakup of the London monopoly, 4. Lo-Cos eroding LGW’s VFR business, its prime User (BA) with itchy feet, such that its value was then at its peak. All sites were bundled so outposts might be spun off, leaving LHR with future debt but no sunk capital. Alone it was not worth £10Bn., but free would be good. The trick will be to unload LGW and/or STN without cannibalising LHR’s business.
Foreigners buy the solid cash-flow of UK Ltd, National Grid to sewers, believing asset book value can be restated at will (windfall paper profit). Municipalities and others in UK don’t agree – short termist (?hag-ridden by Planning, eco, NIMBY – as Ferrovial is discovering).
By: Homer09001 - 28th August 2007 at 12:30
they should sell it of to the local councils like NCL
Sign In
August 28, 2007 at 11:00 am