Sunday, July 9, 2017

Belgrade Airport bidders begin evaluation


The four consortiums and one company that have qualified to bid in the second and final phase for the 25-year concession to operate Belgrade Nikola Tesla Airport have begun making final evaluations of their potential investment. According to the "Večernji list" daily, representatives from each of the five will visit the Serbian capital next week where they will hold one-on-one meetings with the airport's management and tour the facilities in order to get a clearer picture of the business. The five bidders for the concession are a consortium made up of France's Meridiam, Zurich Airport and France's Eiffage, followed by the consortium consisting of India's GMR Infrastructure Limited and Greece's Terna, then South Korea's Incheon International Airport in a consortium with Turkey's Yatirimlar ve isletme and Russia's VTB Capital Infrastructure, a Chinese consortium made up of Hainan Air Travel Service, HNA and China National Aero Technology, and finally a stand-alone bid by France's Vinci. None of the five are obligated to make a final bid.

The Franco-Swiss consortium, which includes Zurich Airport and is believed to have put in a strong offer during the first phase, has become the first to confirm they will make a final attempt at winning the concession. "Our two partners, Meridiam and Eiffage, have committed themselves to the long-term success of the airport of the Serbian capital, bringing important relevant experiences with infrastructure projects in the Central and Eastern Europe region", Philipp Bircher, senior spokesperson for the Swiss company, told "SeeNews". He added that the consortium is preparing a binding bid. Serbia, which has an 83.1% stake in the airport, expects the final deal to be worth around 400 million euros.

The five bidders now have until September 4 to submit their final offer. However, one of the parties has already requested for an extension, noting, "In our experience in this type of tender, we believe that the current timeline is not sufficient to allow for the submission of binding bid applications of the highest quality. Therefore, we kindly request for an extension of phase two and the postponing of the deadline for the submission of the binding bid applications to September 29, 2017". The public body evaluating the bids said it will take the request under consideration. The Serbian Minister for Construction, Transport and Infrastructure, Zorana Mihajlović, said that the winning bid, if there is one, will be known by November, while the deal will be brought to a financial close in March of 2018.

77 comments:

  1. Is it possible for some of the bidders to make a joint bid in the second phase like some of them joined forces after the expression of interest?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks. Maybe we see some new consortium formed for the final offer.

      Delete
    2. It is possible.

      Delete
  2. I hope it's anyone but the French, they are horrible businessmen. Just give it to the Koreans, Incheon is a phenomenal airport and is extremely well run.
    In order not to annoy the Chinese, they can just give them some other government owned company.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. All of the companies listed have strong experience in managing airports except Hainan which manages third tier Chinese airports but no international experience. So I hope it's not the Chinese. I think the Koreans would be good.

      Delete
    2. And some of those third thier chinese airports are the size of Vienna Schwechat...

      Delete
  3. Selling a successful company that has been financing its own development without any loans. Crazy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Tačno. Zašto koncesionar kada su uspešni i tako zarađuju?

      Delete
    2. Because the scope of investments planned in the next 25 years are too big and the airport will be unable to cover it even with the large profit it has at the moment. All the work that has been done at BEG is mostly "šminka".

      Delete
    3. Are you serious? They reconstructed entire terminal 2 in 2006, refurbished all C gates, majority of A gates, got new air bridges, busses, electronic guidance docking system, reconstructed terminal 1, constructed bus gates etc. I would not call that "sminka".

      Delete
    4. Anon 0941: well, you are almost correct. The VDGS that you are referring to is still not working, as I understand it both that tender and the tender for the luggage system is under investigation by the police since the winners are connected to Ultra Kop as correctly described by Kurir about a month ago. Same goes for the perimeter fence which was directly awarded to Ultra Kop. There's just to much corruption which the government can't sort out by themselves. It's not only about having no loans, it's about getting your shit together for the future.

      Delete
    5. The thing about corruption in Serbia (and the Balkans) is that governments do not want it to end. They just offer lip service from time to time. Why, because every government benefits from it. They have to pay back their sponsors, simple as that.

      Delete
  4. Interesting fact is that Belgrade Airport shares have risen 42% in value between 8th July 2016-8th July 2017. They peaked on the day the five final bidders were announced. It is the most expensive share currently on the Belgrade Stock Exchange and regularly the most traded.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Agreed. All is needed is a good management and 'hands off' approach by the government. Sadly that this can only be achieved via sale.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No chance ... IMF is squeezing the Govt's nuts on this... Too many broken and unhealthy loss making public companies such as Srbijagas and Galenika that are a burden on the state's finances havr forced its hand with "healthy" assets such as this one ...

      Delete
  6. Hopefully the Swiss actually make a concrete offer this time with facts and figures because they didn't in Zagreb's case:

    U Ministarstvu mora, prometa i infrastrukture danas je održano javno otvaranje ponuda za davanje koncesije za Zračnu luku Zagreb (ZLZ). Pristigle su dvije ponude, jedna od konzorcija kojeg čine Zračna luka Zürich i Strabag AG, a koja nije čitana jer nije imala brojčane podatke tražene u natječajnoj dokumentaciji i druga od Zagreb Airport International Company (ZAIC) iza koje, prema tvrdnjama ovlaštenog predstavnika, stoje Zračna luka Pariz i Bouygues s lokalnim partnerima.
    ZAIC je ponudio stalnu koncesijsku naknadu koja u 30 godina koncesijskog razdoblja ukupno iznosi 87.237.452 eura, dok će promjenjiva koncesijska naknada koja se računa u određenom postotku od bruto prihoda biti još veća. Istaknuo je to Tomislav Mihotić, državni tajnik za infrastrukturu i predsjednik Stručnog povjerenstva za koncesiju novog putničkog terminala ZLZ, na konferenciji za novinare održanoj nakon javnog otvaranja ponuda.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Svima nam je jasno da niste imali pravi natjecaj. Zato i imate ovu skarabudzenu zgradu terminala. Videcemo kako cemo mi proci.

      Delete
    2. Anon @9.34AM
      Da, stvarno je šteta što nismo dobili Doha Hamad 2. Sve ispod toga su bačene pare.
      ROFL.

      Delete
    3. Па није да су бачене паре али сви знамо да Французи нису испунили оно што су обећали. Нико није рекао да је нови аеродром безвезе већ да није оно због чега је Французима додељен посао.

      Delete
    4. Ovo "skarabuđena" zgrada sigurno ne znači: "Ma u redu je, samo kaj su tu i tamo skresali troškove".

      Delete
  7. The thing is, we don't exactly know what the requirement the government has given to the future concessionaire. With Zagreb we knew they requested a new terminal. But has any request been made here?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No. Not during the concession phase which I think is a big mistake. They will discuss this after they choose a winner but the winner will not be legally obligated, unless they make such promise in their actual bid. But I highly doubt any of the bidders will voluntarily commit themselves to building a new terminal.

      Delete
    2. BEG does not need a new terminal. It's current capacity is way over what is currently required or will be required in the next 5 years.

      Delete
    3. I am sorry but I cant agree with you on this one. BEG is in a desperate need of a new terminal.
      The current one is getting too small, not enough restaurants, cafes, duty free shops... on top of that, the ceiling being too low gives you the impression you are in some underground parking lot.

      Yes, the airport has not reached its maximum capacity but it becomes an absolute zoo in the morning, around noon and in the evening. The other day we boarded our turboprop from A10. It was such a wonderful experience having 55 passengers crammed in that 2 by 2 space.

      If we are going to require a new terminal in the next five years then shouldn't we start working on it right now? That's about the time needed to build a new one.

      Delete
    4. Ovakvi turbo idioti kao Nemjee nikad nisu leteli preko Frankfurta, Minhena CDG i slicnih mesta kad je glavni saobracajni deo dana? Kada su ogromne guzve na tim aerodromima. Stvarno vas treba naterati da se bordujete samo sa malih delova aerodroma sa malim wc za stotinu putnika u cekanici za autobus kao na nekima od tih aerodroma.

      Delete
    5. Ocito da ti nikada nisi bio na MUC posto tamo nema 'malih' gejtova poput A10. Kada budes leteo odande sa LH shvatices da se ukrcavanja za stajanke odvijaju sa standardnih izlaza samo sto se ode sprat ispod i udje se u autobus.

      FRA ima bus gejtove koji su tri puta veci od A10 ili A4a/A4b.

      Na kraju krajeva, sta to treba da znaci? Samo zato sto odredjeni aerodromi imaju 'nedostataka' da je to opravdanje da ih imamo i mi?

      Pritom, sama cinjenica da oslovljavas druge sa 'turbo idiotima' vise govori o tebi nego o bilo kom drugom. Taj primitivan nacin izrazavanja je ogavan i nije primeren iole obrazovanim ljudima

      Delete
    6. Tvoje njakanje nece ocistiti wc-e na tim aerodromima za prljave Balkance i Turke.
      Nivo usluge im je ocajan za razliku od BEG.

      Delete
    7. U pravu si, izvinjavam se. BEG nudi znatno visi nivo usluge od MUC i FRA, posebno kada se radi o wcima.

      Delete
    8. They are asking for 400 million Euro's. Zagreb had a condition that a new terminal had to be built.

      If Belgrade can get the 400 million plus a new terminal than that would be a massive win.

      Delete
    9. Nemjee - you have made the case against yourself as to why no new terminal is needed. Yes, morning, noon and evening is solid, but otherwise, it is a ghost town.

      So what, you need more airlines to fly at these times in order to put more pressure on take off slots at these times ?

      It just needs better slot coordination to manage off peak times - which has even more capacity than there currently is.

      Manage that and you have better utilisation of the asset, saving the concessionaire and ultimately airlines and pax from inevitable fee increases - which is the only thing that will happen if they are forced into building an unnecessary terminal.

      When and if that starts to max out, then maybe they can look at terminal expansion

      Delete
    10. Why don't you use your brain before posting? There is a reason why no one flies at those times. What would be the point of JU moving its DUS departure from 06.35 to 10.00? What incentives they could get that would make up for the loss of their transfer passengers.

      There is a reason why LH's MUC flight arrives in teh same wave as JU's region.

      Your argument is beyond flawed and I agree wiith other posters on here that a terminal is needed

      Delete
  8. Speaking of Belgrade Airport growth in July is around 10%, the month should end with around 8-9% growth which is great. Big percentile increase in growth should occur in the last few months of the year.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. +1 I think we might see 15% to 20% growth this winter due to Hainan and Wizz Air.

      Delete
    2. Hainan will be the smallest factor there. Mostly because of Wizz Air, Transavia, Atlas global, Fly dubai, Qatar. Foreign airlines are smashing it this year at BEG. Huge growth.

      Delete
    3. Plus Etihad which plans on sending its A321.

      I am following Qatar's developments on the local market. They sure do know how to make a certain market work in their favor. They went from flying 30 passengers via Ankara to sending daily flights that are full to the last seat.

      Let's hope they add more flights/seats next year.

      Delete
    4. Pegasus will send its A320 NEO to BEG again today.:)

      Delete
    5. To be fair, EY is yet to announce its W17/18 schedule to BEG.

      I tend to agree with you that JU's exit from the market will cause a great ''spillage'' for EY unless they increase capacity, and introducing the A321 (from the full A320 on most days) will bring in an addition of only 38 seats on each sector; this by simple math would not afford them sufficient coverage for JU's share and results in a net loss of roughly 85 passengers per sector on average. No airline in their right mind would allow for that.

      So my bottom line is, while the A321 is an up-gauge in real terms, it will hurt EY's market share and market potential presented. A widebody ''must'' be deployed straight away and their 262-pax A330-200s are the perfect fit for this now mature route.

      Delete
    6. Etihad's greatest advantage was that it provided its passengers, sorry I mean guests, with a lot of flexibility due to Air Serbia's flight.
      By losing a daily departure, they will become no better than Qatar or flydubai while Turkish Airlines will become the airline of choice for those flying to Asia and Africa.

      If I were them I would have increased Belgrade to double daily A319, or at least 10, 11 weekly.

      Even if Etihad upgauges BEG to an A321/A330, what competitive advantage would they have over Qatar or Turkish Airlines?

      Delete
    7. With an A330 - a better product (especially in business), more flexibility on the market with fares, greater cargo opportunities...

      They do lose convenient connectivity to some destinations but I personally believe that JU's loss from the route can ultimately be turned to their advantage through better product consistency (many EY pax complained about JU service to AUH vs that offered on EY) plus pax prefer widebody equipment on flights of 5 hrs.

      TK is still seen by many (that I know personally) as a risky transfer and pax tend to bypass IST transits for safety reasons. This will improve over time, but another turmoil similar to the one seen at Ataturk would be detrimental to its efforts.

      QR should be of far more concern to EY, but they will be offering a single daily flight as well, so no ''real'' difference per say.

      Ultimately, fares will do the trick, since quality and comfort are offered by all three.

      Delete
    8. I omitted a comment on FZ simply because FZ is not in the same league as EY or QR.

      Despite its hybrid model and service, the product is below that of QR and EY and anyone who has ever connected with FZ via Terminal 2 in DXB knows the horror they endured.

      Delete
    9. Honestly, I would love for EY to upgrade its flight to an A332 but from what I heard they are only considering upgrading the route to an A321. However, things change on a daily basis so who knows what will happen in the end.

      If they end up having a daily departure on the A321 then there might be some 'problems' as their overall situation in BEG will worsen and they will be on par with Qatar.

      I agree that FZ is not a direct competitor but unlike QR and EY it has a lot of O&D on which it can rely to fill its seats. That means that they can be more flexible in terms of prices for their transfers and we all know how price sensitive locals are.

      Maybe they can't compete for premium passengers but they can be attractive for those who plan on flying in economy class. How many Serbs will pay an additional €50 just to fly on Qatar or Etihad?

      As for Turkish Airlines, so far their flights are packed despite all the chaos in Turkey. Atlasjet is a new player in Belgrade so let's see how successful they are in capturing a share of passengers flying between Serbia and the Middle East.

      Delete
    10. Can EY go double daily on narrow-body to compensate for JUs exit? What would connectivity be on either ends? Schedule?

      Qatar managed to capture the market share with their prices not with their product. Promotions like 410 EUR to Hong Kong or 600 to Japan were insane. They are still fighting with Turkish which one is going to be cheaper. No wonder they are both packed out of BEG.

      Delete
    11. The thing is that TK is no longer that cheap, their prices to Asia are on average around €600 to €700.

      Delete
    12. I know that Turkish is not always cheap, per se. However, they always manage to be highly competitive when it comes to pricing and/or convenience. I looked for JNB or DUR for this October, they are most convenient. QR is 210 EUR cheaper but with hideously long layover in Doha which turns BEG-JNB-DUR trip into 35+ hour ordeal. Last year, Algiers on Turkish ended up being the cheapest by far (if 460 EUR for BEG-IST-ALG can be called "cheap")

      Delete
    13. Nemjee and other anon's - you guys need to take a cold shower. You are forever advocating an upgauge of EY equipment or an increase in frequency.

      I'm even more surprised with Nemjee - who as a former JU employee - should know that Abu Dhabi is a massive loss making route for JU, as it also is for EY. Why do you think they are pulling off the route ? Market share doesn't deliver profitability, nor does frequency.

      Yields are extremely poor due to the segmentation of the market and the distances that people are travelling to fly AUH-BEG and vv.

      There are simply too many seats for the market and more are only going to depress even further, yields and therefore, worsen the losses on this route.

      What it needs is less seats rather than more.

      The game has dramatically changed for JU and EY, while for QR and TK, they can continue as is, as both are heavily subsidised airlines, with totally different mandates

      Delete
    14. Flydubai and Qatar have no problem making money so what's the problem with EY? JU I know, they can't make any route work.

      Delete
    15. Oh... EY is also massively subsidized but they are still a,mess.

      Delete
    16. Anon at 6.05pm - neither makes money flying to BEG. QR get a positive contribution to their routes into DOH, but the feed beyond DOH, given the pro-rated yields, is not profitable

      Delete
    17. For the hygienist at 5:36, by your logic all feeder routes are loss making, and to substantiate my statement, simply have a look at fares from other European cities (further than BEG - meaning greater CASK)on EY/QR/EK, all much lower due to stiffer competition (granted more premium traffic, that I will give you). By up-gauging and when you have a critical mass, you can mitigate lower yields with quantity (mind you BEG yields are higher than say MUC in Y but competition drives them further south and that is a fact), something that is very difficult to achieve with smaller aircraft - that is why 100 seaters are all but dead in most markets.

      By reducing own capacity in hope to drive yields north, all you are doing is inviting competition to absorb the spill and they will happily do it in BEG. Days of protectionism are over, either you are in it cut-throat, or you are out. The key is lowering costs in order to afford to stay afloat with globally reducing yields - not just in the Serbian market!

      On the reasons behind JU's failure on the AUH route - I believe there are many, not least being the tye of passenger carried (transist) but also wrong product on such a long flight, as well as IMHO - wrong UAE destination. DXB is what is demanded from BEG (both P2P and transit). JU's flights were primarily feeder traffic from day one, and feeding a hub more than 5 hours away is always going to be ridiculously challenging profit wise. That is why JU always liked channeling pax via short hops such as AMS, CDG, FRA etc...

      Delete
    18. Friend - i think you have applied the wrong word for the point you are trying to make - not sure what hygiene has to do with anything other than the cold harsh realities that the route is loss making for BOTH JU AND EY. Numbers don't lie.

      EY has far better yielding routes in which to send its widebodies instead of BEG.

      The mood has turned and both airlines will be shedding loss making routes going forward.

      More to come ....

      Delete
    19. Etihad is getting out of Air Serbia or at least reducing synergies.

      Delete
    20. Etihad is a joke of an airline. EK and QR are professionally run airlines and their CEOs operate a tight ship.

      Both JU and EY are masters when it comes to making up excuses to justify their failures. Hogan was sacked so what are they waiting for to do the same to Dane?!

      Delete
  9. A new terminal should be one of the priorities. By 2022, BEG will probably handle at least 8 or 9 million passengers, which would be the limit of the current capacity. If they start building a new terminal next year, that is when it would be built. I suppose that if the growth keeps on, BEG will have at least 15 million passengers per year by 2030.

    ReplyDelete
  10. So far BEG is seeing a great day, 2 A321s this morning, from IST and ZRH but LH is sending its own from MUC which is extremely unusual. Transavia with its B738 today.
    I have a feeling July will be great this year.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I want to add that LH will not be reducing BEG this winter, both MUC and FRA will have double daily flights unlike last year.

      Delete
    2. So why does AS not fly to MUC?

      Delete
    3. Because their management is useless.

      Delete
    4. They dont have available planes.

      Delete
  11. o/t does anyone know how is the BEG-OHD route performing?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's actually doing great with transfers, that's why it was moved to the night and increased to four flights.

      Delete
  12. OT: EK reduce ZAG in W17/18 to 5pw. No 1&3 flights on emirates.com

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They will use A388 on those flights for sure 😂😂😂😂

      Delete
    2. QR likes this.

      Delete
    3. So, they're keeping the flights to ZAG? Great news!

      Delete
    4. ^ lol it was not launched as a seasonal route. They are downgrading frequencies which is not great news.

      Delete
    5. Well, there are less people during winter, nothing to worry about!

      Delete
    6. Exactly. Wish you were so smart and full of reason when you were yelling "disaster" and "bankruptcy" when Air Serbia reduced its winter operations to New York.

      Delete
    7. Bravo Hrvatska !

      Delete
    8. Even 5 pw in the winter is 2 too many ... 3 pw is more than enough, especially given the size of the aircraft deployed on this route

      Delete
    9. Oh no! My growth projections for visiting tourists are now shaken and stirred!

      Delete
    10. Hahahaha yeah where is that guy now to tell us how we are haters for predicting this. :D

      Delete
    11. Traditionally every airline that reduces winter frequency in the region gets the same treatment here: management is called incompetent, replacement is imminent. President Tim Clark, get ready to resign!

      Delete
    12. I remember some experts on here used EK's daily flights in their calculations in order to predict future growth.

      Delete
  13. Da li je neko koristio nove saltere odnosno masine za automatsku predaju prtljaga (automated bag drop) u Beogradu? Ne vidim na slikama gde se nalaze?

    ReplyDelete
  14. I hope it will go to the French! They did a great job at Zagreb

    ReplyDelete
  15. That was sarcasm right?

    ReplyDelete

EX-YU Aviation News does not tolerate insults, excessive swearing, racist, homophobic or any other chauvinist remarks or provocative posts with the intention of creating further arguments. A full list of comment guidelines can be found here. Thank you for your cooperation.