Logwritten
SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 29, 2009 11:52 AM IST

We started our planning process around nine months ago. We know, we need the second runway by 2012-13, if we continue to grow as we grow now. We need a second terminal at the same time, four years from now. Next week we’ll go to the board and give the preliminary information and three months from now, we’ll give a concrete proposal.

Is the additional investment linked to valuation and divestment of stake as there has been talk of Bial being valued at $2.5 billion (Rs10,775 crore) or more?

Fact is that we do not have revenues from domestic passengers. User development fee (UDF) is the backbone of our revenue and 80% of traffic is domestic and we don’t have revenue (from domestic traffic) for the first three months. Therefore, there is a certain reluctance (on the part of our investors for additional investment).

None of them have, however, said I am not interested in infusing additional money. None of them have ever said we (have to) go public for funding. I give you my word it has never been discussed. It could be a solution because it is cheaper than borrowing from banks but (it is only one of the solutions being considered).

What is the investment for an intermediate terminal?

We are thinking whether we need to build a functional terminal or a slightly bigger shell that can accommodate more people. It is being considered. Building should be below Rs100 crore and the apron expansion should be more... that would mean an investment of another Rs200-300 crore at least.

There is apprehension that the project is goldplated and you have not opened the books completely.

We are completely transparent. There are two representatives of Karnataka and government of India and the books are open to them.

Feeling among investors?

Initially we projected break-even in seven-and-a-half years. However, since then we had to make more investment but we also have more passengers. If we could charge the UDF, we will break even in five years. As I told you before, we need to invest further. Really, it is the (capital) appreciation of the airport, not the revenue, that makes (this project) more interesting for the investor.

Airlines are bleeding. Your outlook? Seen any cancellation of short-haul flights ?

Airlines are our customers. They are in a tight position, GoAir and Paramount have suspended one flight each. We have no indication of a slowdown for the winter schedule. In September, we will get a clear indication.

Arguments in favour of keeping the short-haul flights from the old airport and indemnifying Bial for those losses. Comments.

I feel sorry that they still come up with those arguments. You can indemnify our loss but in the long run, it is the loss of the city. The city will lose out having a strong airport and an opportunity to attract lot of international airlines and make it stronger. Airlines are already losing money. They will also lose money by (spending on) additional resources in two airports.

K. Raghu contributed to this interview.

Tags - Find More Articles On:
READ MORE ARTICLES BY:
 
Vikram Said:


Mr. Brunner, I think is being foolish, when he says and I quote "The city will lose out having a strong airport and an opportunity to attract lot of international airlines and make it stronger. Airlines are already losing money." Hasn't he ever been to London where they have two airports operating - Heathrow & Gatwick - Is that a loss to London??? No - instead I think it's brilliant a concept and India should also have two airports in the high traffic volume cities - Mumbai, Delhi, Bangalore, etc.

Posted On 7/8/2008 9:25:33 AM
Veeresh Said:


Albert Brummer must be indeed a very happy man - the interview carried in your newspaper on the 8th of July'08 let him off the hook on all the really contentious issues that any regular user of the new airport in Bengaluru will point out. To start with, the air-cargo terminal is far from ready - as a result, all landside activity is still carried out at the old HAL Airport. Customs seem to be absent at BIAL cargo. In other words, documents flow up and down from BIAL to HAL, which increase the demurrage charges at BIAL, which works fine for BIAL I guess. That's a major component of any revenue at any airport in the world - passengers are not as profitable, simply put. Next, for the bulk of the passengers travelling to and from BIAL by BMTC buses, crossing other road traffic at least twice is an invitation to disaster. A very simple change in the flow would enable bus passengers to embark and disembark right on the main landing area, but no, that would make things very simple and impact parking as well as taxi franchisee revenues. So, bus passengers are pushed away into a distance, and then they need to scurry through other road traffic. This does not happen in any other world airport, not even in Zurich, so Brummer would know. Please also take a look at the width of the staircases provided to take passengers from the check-in area to the security area upstairs. There are international standards on how wide these stair-cases should be, in case they are needed to be used for emergency evacuations, and these do not confirm. We also do not see so much fire-fighting and life-saving equipment as we see at airports worldwide - and if it is there, then maybe some signage might help. The area around BIAL used to be fertile and green, and has now been reduced to a dust-bowl, so much so that 10-15 minutes outside and you will need a shower. Provision for which, even if payment is made, is not available. Provincial Airport, BIAL, actually.

Posted On 7/10/2008 10:49:01 AM
Raghu Said:


Why on earth should a huge infrastructure project like an airport, be designed in such a way tht it "breaks even" in 5 years ? They shd target a break even in 20-30 years and thats the way all infrastructure projects operate all over the world. Here, the idea is tht they have to be a "monopoly" and that they must be able to do everything on their own terms. Good to see tht Mr. Brunner is not even making an iota of effort to hide the fact tht this is a real-estate money making enterprise. I wud propose tht the govt: treat BIAL not as a public service utility but as a profit making enterprise and hence, revoke all the orders waivering stamp duty, tax, levy etc and must not give it the status of an SEZ. They shd also open HAL airport immediately and all low cost airlines must be operating out of HAL. Theres no other way to protect public interest.

Posted On 7/10/2008 3:09:02 PM
Vishvas Said:


Mr. Brunner's argument look more like ones for the sake of doing so. There does not appear to be any logic in what he says. I dont think one would like to pay a UDF for the horrible, sub-standard facilities at BIAL. This airport is nothing better than the HAL airport. I boarded an International Flight out of BIAL and there was only one flight at the time I boarded. The security hold area looked too full and claustrophobic. The domestic area is no better. Early in the mornings, there would be queues for the toilets! What planning is this!!!! This is just a transfer of monopoly from AAI to BIAL. Given so much of resources, there is little doubt in my mind that AAI would have done more or less the same job.

Posted On 7/21/2008 4:06:02 PM