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.
Comments
In order not to annoy the Chinese, they can just give them some other government owned company.
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.
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.
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.
Da, stvarno je šteta što nismo dobili Doha Hamad 2. Sve ispod toga su bačene pare.
ROFL.
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.
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?
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
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.
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.
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.
I have a feeling July will be great this year.
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.
Nivo usluge im je ocajan za razliku od BEG.
If Belgrade can get the 400 million plus a new terminal than that would be a massive win.
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
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
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...
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 ....
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?!
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