VINCI unveils Belgrade Airport plans


VINCI Airports, which has been awarded a 25-year concession of Belgrade Nikola Tesla Airport has said it plans to increase the airport's traffic and connectivity by supporting Air Serbia's long haul expansion and using its close contacts with a number of foreign carriers. In a statement, the French company said, "As concessionaire, VINCI Airports will aim at improving airport operating conditions to enable Air Serbia to offer new long haul routes as part of its hub strategy. VINCI Airports will build on its partnerships with over 200 airlines to further increase the airport’s traffic and connectivity, in line with Serbia’s strong economic growth potential". Late last year, Air Serbia noted it was undertaking a feasibility study over the introduction of its second long haul service after New York, which has since been identified as Toronto.

VINCI Airports has further said it will capitalise on the substantial airport management and development expertise it has acquired in France, Portugal, Japan and other countries to improve Belgrade's overall airport customer experience, notably by reorganising and optimising passenger flows and expanding retail areas. VINCI Airports Chairman, Nicolas Notebaert, said, “This success marks a new stage in VINCI Airports’ expansion outside France. Belgrade Nikola Tesla Airport will serve as the company's “hub” in Southeast Europe, a geographical area in which VINCI Airports has not operated until now”.


The French company noted it plans to sign the concession agreement during the first quarter of this year and take full control of the airport by the end of 2018, following financial close. The Public Body overseeing the concession process has previously said it expects for the future operator to take over by August 1. VINCI plans to invest 732 million euros into Belgrade Airport and intends on handling seven million passengers per year by 2024 and ten million by 2030, according to the Serbian President. He further noted that the concession agreement guarantees for the unhindered development of Serbia's other commercial airports.

Comments

  1. This would indicate that Air Serbia is definitely launching Toronto this summer.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I still don't see with what plane and how.

      Delete
    2. Pa nisu dobili koncesiju da ojacaju Er Srbiju nego aerodrom

      Delete
    3. "VINCI Airports will aim at improving airport operating conditions to enable Air Serbia to offer new long haul routes as part of its hub strategy"

      Delete
    4. You lease an additional plane and you fly it. Not exactly a groundbreaking idea.

      Delete
    5. Is Vinci funding an additional aircraft for Air Serbia? Amazing. I mean it’s not like JU or EY can afford it.

      Delete
    6. They are obviously informed of what Air Serbia is planning to do, much better than some of 'expert' commentators on this site.

      Delete
    7. Yes right. How are they going to do that? AS have already full support on ground. Airport is not going to buy them a new plane or give free fuel.
      Airport needs to attract new airlines like they do in Zagreb

      Delete
    8. If you read their statement, they say they will attract new airlines. You have to realize that Air Serbia generates 50% of all passengers at the airport and will naturally be an important partner to them.

      Delete
    9. Air Serbia is already paying for its services meaning that any new longhaul route could be offered massive discounts in the first few years of operations.

      Delete
    10. Of course they want JU to develop long haul. This brings transfer passengers. The biggest spenders at airports (at shops) are transfer passengers.

      Delete
    11. Speaking hypothetically, what other long haul routes would Air Serbia go for if it were to expand its long haul network, other than Toronto.

      Delete
    12. Chicago, Shanghai, Bangkok (seasonally)

      Delete
    13. At this point only Toronto, Chicago and Shanghai.

      Delete
    14. Air Serbia recently announced 6 weekly NY for next summer. Can they realistically do this with 1 plane.... this could be telling us something.

      Delete
    15. Rumour is that JU will lease 1 A332 from EY for the peak summer months. JFK will be flown 6 p/w while JU has requested and recieved for 4 slots p/w in YYZ. Apparently JU are making preparations for ground handling etc in YYZ.

      During the winter, as it seems for now, JU will keep both destinations, operated with 1 ac (YU-ARA) with the usual seasonal reduction.

      Delete
    16. We are probably going to see a similar schedule like JFK. When JFK goes at 11 YYZ will got at 07.30 and the other way around. I doubt they will have both at the same time at the airport.

      Delete
  2. I still don't get if they are obligated to build a new terminal or not?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We won't know until they publish the details of the concession agreement.

      Delete
    2. Also the second runway project and the rail connection.

      Delete
    3. Pa aerodromu u narednih desetak godina nije ni potreban novi terminal-ovaj sadašnji posle najnovijih sredjivanja ima kapacitet od 7-8 miliona. Neka dograde još 4 mosta za širokotrupce i tada će na aerodromu biti čak 20 avio mostova, a to je i više nego dovoljno za duži period. Ono što koncesionar takodje treba da uradi je izgradnja drugog sprata na terminalu kako bi se povećao prostor za ugostiteljske usluge, gradnja hotela, novih manevarskih površina, još jedne rulne staze, železničko povezivanje sa gradom i da se uradi sveukupno šminkanje svega. To bi za narednih 15 godina bilo više nego dovoljno, a tek onda novi terminal.

      Delete
    4. At least for another 15 years, probably longer, a second runway would be the most unneeded possible investment. What a waste of money and resources.

      Delete
    5. It would be wise to start investing in it now while there is still space and before massive delays start. Look at how many runways AMS built over the years. They didn't need them but they had vision... something you obviously don't have.

      Delete
    6. I was unclear. I meant to say to start building a runway in 15 years so it's done in 22-25 years. Until 20 million pax one runway is more than sufficient on any airport.
      It's not called vision - instead it should be called delusion of megalomania to invest now in something totally unnecessary which also causes notable running costs each year.
      Let's see if the concession agreement includes the construction of a second runway in a short term perspective.

      Delete
    7. It didn't create that much extra cost in SKG, OTP, BUD, BTS, WAW, PRG... so I don't see why BEG would be any different. Or maybe you know something we don't?

      Delete
    8. You say that a new runway would create "not that much extra cost".

      Currently, I have the numbers here for a planned new runway in Vienna and in Munich.

      Planned initial costs for new runway at:
      VIE: 1.8 billion EUR
      MUC: 1.59 billion EUR

      Even with general cost structure in Serbia being signifcantly lower than in Austria and Germany, you still wont get below 800-900 million EUR in BEG for a new runway. That is if we estimate that you will pay only half in SRB compared to DE/AT, which is quite a stretch.

      Delete
    9. By that logic we don't need a new ATC tower, we don't need a new terminal, we don't need new coffeeshops...

      As mentioned earlier, BEG wouldn't be the only one in the region to have two runways. Others are doing fine, so will we.

      Delete
    10. That is nonsense.

      A new terminal with better infrastructure inside for travellers is needed, that is a necessary investment that will be useful within the next 20 years - there cannot be doubt about that.

      Also, I would like to see a rail link, that would also be a large investment, even if it is less than 2km needed, but at least that investment would bring a real additional value to the airport and its pax.

      A new runway in stark contrast is neither useful nor would it be necessary.

      Delete
    11. All the things you listed are not necessary either. We can live without them, why bother since they are only going to increase costs? Who needs a rail link when you have a bus to Slavija that stops by the station?

      Delete
  3. Good. I hope they attract more European legacy airlines that used to fly to BEG like Air France, British Airways, SAS.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I hope they attract airlines that never previously flew to BEG. European legacies wouldn't really add much to the mix, except potentially more competitive prices.

      Delete
    2. I don't think this is in the Vinci's hands . this is a matter of each airlines operation.if the airline believe that this inaugural flight is going to be profitable they will do it,if they don't so it's logic they won't.

      Delete
    3. An airport plays an important role in attracting airline. Many airlines don't realize the potential of certain markets unless they are presented with it. Also they could have a more enticing incentive policy for new arrivals. The current management has done nothing to attract new airlines. All the airlines that have started flights to BEG in the last few years did so because of their own estimates and calculations

      Delete
    4. "enticing incentive policy for new arrivals " Sorry my friend but you still don't explain anything. So how they will do it, lower more the airport fees,subsidize the airlines to come ? So as I said this is just in the hands of each airline and this depends on many reasons, mostly about 70% for tourist reasons and we all know that Serbia is not a main tourist destination yet.

      Delete
    5. An incentive policy is an incentive policy which is used by many airports. You lower handling prices for the first year or two to help the airline reach profitability on the route and afterwards charge full prices.

      Delete
    6. So you agree on what I said before , the Vinci company has to make discounts to the airlines to attract them....so we agreed

      Delete
    7. That's what I said from the start. Zagreb Airport also has an incentive policy for new arrivals, new routes, airlines to fly the whole year etc.

      Delete
  4. Matematika mi nikako ne pase.
    Ako se koncesionar obvezao na 730 mil.ulaganja i 501 mil.up front, to je 1.25 milijardi $ (manje par mil).

    Da bi bio ja 0, aerodrom bi trebao imati prosjecnu dobit od 60 mil. $ godisnje.
    Ako sad s 5 mil.putnika ostvaruje 28 mil. $ dobiti.....dakle, tek za 12 godina bi (teoretski) dostigao isplativost investicije....

    Nesto tu ne stina.

    A nisam uzeo u obzir ni iznos godisnje koncesijske naknade.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Aerodrom ima 28 miliona godisnje zato sto je drzava upravljala njime. Sad kad dodju privatnici, bice dobit MNOGO veca. Ne zaradjuje aerodrom samo od taksi, ima tu dosta stvari na kojima moze da se radi i sto moze da vodi povecanju dobiti.

      Delete
    2. Slazem se.
      Od raspustanja prekobrojnog broja ljudi i sve sta ide s tim.
      No, zar nije obecano kako do toga nece doci.

      Mada, place su tu najmanja stavka.
      U apsolutnim brojkama i nisu velike.

      Tu je, nadalje, i parking koji ne bi smio poskupiti...kao ni taxe.
      Tu su i razni ugostiteljski objekti koji nose velik novac...

      Ima toga...no ipak, ne pase matrmatika nikako.

      Delete
    3. Cena parkiranja će sigurno otići u vasionu, to će im biti prvi potez.

      Dalje, Dufry drži monopol na ugostiteljskim sadržajima i to će sigurno biti razbijeno (hvaljen Isus).

      Može se još dosta toga napraviti. Sad, hoće li biti dovoljno za 60M godišnjeg profita to ćemo videti. Nije lako ali nije ni nemoguće.

      Najbitnije je da se Srbija zaštiti od bilo kakve odredbe po kojoj bi im plaćala nekakav "projektovan a neostvaren" profit.

      Delete
    4. Pa povećatće cenu aerodromskih taksi ko u Zagrebu i eto kalkulacije

      Delete
    5. Regarding parking, the BEG airport does not operate any parking. Both car parks - open air and closed garage are run by city-owned Parking servis and they set the prices.

      Delete
    6. Zelim istaknuti, kao sto i sami znate, kako politicarima nije za vjerovati.
      AV je obecao kako povecanja taxi nece biti 3 godine, a ni otpustanja.
      Budite uvjereni kako ce, cim VINCI preuzme aerodrom, to biti prvi potez.

      Nego, suska se nesto i oko stavke o "ekskluzivnosti".....

      Delete
    7. O ko to suska? Ti?

      Delete
    8. I agree that numbers look very ambitious. Growth, definition of investment and Transfer pricing hold the key. And of course, any conditions attached to the payout.

      Delete
    9. Zelim istaknuti anonmosu od 9:35 i u prethodnim postovima da mi je zao sto se ne potpisuje jer bi se onda videlo da je on onaj sto je pricao da se suska da su dobili 20% manje nego sto traze i da zato odlazu odluku o koncesiji.

      Tada bi se videlo da su njegova suskanja od sigurnih izvora i niko ne bi ni zlazio u raspravu o cemu on govori.

      AV je obecao 450 i vise ti 350 i manje... 1:0 za AV sorry...

      Delete
    10. Vrlo je lako podici dobit. Za pocetak otkaz za nekih 500 ljudi, na godisnjem nivou veoma veliki iznos. AV je obecao, al jedno je obecanje jedno je ugovorna obaveza. Parking nije u vlasnistvu aerodroma, al svakako sadrzaja na aerodromu fali.
      Sve u svemu dublje analize bi dodale bar jos jedno 30-tak miliona godisnje.

      Delete
    11. Аеродром мора да отвори барем још једно пет кафића. Можда ће конкуренција снизити цену кафе која се за обични нес креће око 300 динара!

      Да не спомињем то што када се прође пасошка контрола нема довољно ресторана, барова или кафића.

      Delete
    12. Parking nije u vlasništvu aerodroma ali možda aerodrom iznajmljuje prostor na kome se svi ti objekti nalaze Parking Servisu?
      Povećaš naknadu za to i eto rešenja :)

      Delete
    13. Could you people write in English?

      Delete
    14. Misli da preko 75% prihoda aerodroma Nikola Tesla potice od taksi, sto je mnogo i previse. Tako da koncesionar ima jako mnogo prostora da promeni strukturu i dodatnu zaradi na uslugama (ugostiteljsto, prodaja, hotel..) Parking na BEG je u rukama Parking servisa a ne Aerodroma.

      Delete
  5. "intends on handling seven million passengers per year by 2024 and ten million by 2030"

    In 2017 BEG handled 5.3mil.

    I think this is not so ambitious, or I think wrong??

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Or maybe they are being cautious.

      Delete
    2. Some posters here were claiming that BEG could have 8 million pax a year by 2020.

      Delete
    3. I am also a bit disapointed by that.
      7 years for an increase of just 1,7 million seems very conservative.
      It is less than 250.000 passengers per year.
      The rest oh southeast Europe airports are growing a lot faster than that.

      Delete
    4. @Anon 9:35
      So just 7 million in 2024 is very little by comparison.

      Delete
    5. So you take commentators seriously here? Some commentators here said that the airport concession is a bust, that New York flights would never launch and that Beijing flights would never launch. That New York would be suspended in its first year.

      Maybe they put conservative figures in the contract (if they are in the contract) because they would have to pay penalties if for some reason those figures were not reached.

      Maybe they don't plan to start building a new terminal until 2024 and since the current two terminals have a combined capacity of 7 million they used that.

      Maybe BEG has a limit to its growth. I can't keep expanding every year by 10%.

      Delete
    6. I'm sure BEG will hit 7 mil by 2021. These numbers are way too conservative.

      Delete
    7. Probably a high chance that they’re using conservative figures so, down the line, they can boast about over achieving.

      Delete
    8. Anonymous at 9:48 AM
      I fail to see how BEG is unable to reach anual growth above 3-4% according to the published projection of 7 million by 2024 when every other airport in Southeastern Europe is way, way above that.
      And not only here but to the whole of Europe too!
      This projection means that BEG unlike everyone else will esentialy stagnate for growth.

      Delete
    9. Šta se sve ovde neće pročitati..pa stavili su projekciju od 7 miliona do 2024. kako ne bi medjusobno plaćali penale ako bude manje. Dakle i država i koncesionar su sada mirni jer će se tih 7 miliona dostići puno ranije i nema plaćanja penala. Ovaj gore piše kako je Vučić obećao da nema otpuštanja i da to ništa ne znači..Halo komšije, nemojte se brinuti, očigledno je postignut odličan koncesioni dogovor, bolji od svih u "regionu", i sve će to lepo biti uobličeno u ugovor..bez brige.

      Delete
    10. Ne moraju da otpuštaju, dovoljno je da ne produže ugovore sa radnicima na odredjeno i ode pola ljudi.

      Delete
  6. They have done an excellent job at all the airports they are currently managing. So I have no reason to doubt they will do the same here.

    ReplyDelete
  7. VINCI svojom prezentacijom buduceg razvoja "Nikole Tesle" pokazuje stvarni razvoj, dogradnju i gradnju objekata na terminalima. Infrastrukture, i ostalog sto ce ovu vazdusnu luku Srbije transformisati u nivo velicine aerodroma u Atini. Resiti zahtev kapaciteta za iducich bar 50 godina. Tu se podrazumeva i izgradnja novog kargo i konsignacionog centra sa saobracajnom infrastrukturom. Vredi ziveti i leteti. Meni su tek 72 godine i 78-mi inter-kontinentalni let sa ove do sada malog aerodroma. Vreme preporoda aerodroma je stiglo u Srbiju. Valjda ce mi biti darovano jos neko leto i godina da posmatram i letim izmedju Nikole Tesle i Kigsford Smith-a u Sydneju. Moram spomenuti i Konstantin Veliki, Moravu i Ponikve. U ovoj godini. Srecna Nova Godina. Dobar razvoj i mirni letovi.
    Rodney. 🇷🇸🇦🇺
    Kraljevo - Sydney

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Roki, BEG neće nikada imati broj putnika kao Atina, nikada.

      Delete
    2. Исто сте рекли да Београд никада неће имати лет за Њујорк па ето нас ту данас. Исто сте рекли да Београда никада неће имати лет за Пекинг па ето нас ту данас.

      Београд је већ премашио пет милиона. Сада када је Дане протеран и доведен нормалан менаџмент Ер Србија ће поново почети да расте. Ако ишта, ЈУ барем има бољи географски положај од Еџиана.

      Delete
  8. I don't think people can comment on the particularities of the concession before they see the concession agreement, which the government said they would publish.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think you underestimate people from the Balkans :)

      Delete
    2. Let's wait and see their full plans before passing judgment shall we. We will probably know in March.

      Delete
  9. No word about new terminal construction?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I am also frankly quite disappointed about this "plan.
      I hope they know a lot more than what they have communicated here. This is just the expected general blabla from the winning company that is however lacking almost any hard facts.

      Delete
    2. They won't come out with any hard facts before the concession contract is signed.

      Delete
  10. I think more than anything this concession is a good signal for other investors in the country.

    ReplyDelete
  11. In other BEG-related news, Wizz Air has rearranged most of its schedule. For example, LCA will operate on Tuesdays and Saturdays with a new schedule:

    12.20-15.50 // 16.25-18.10

    Malta was moved to 06.00, MMX to 17.20 and so on.

    I am under the impression that Wizz Air is struggling to fully and profitably employ both of its A320s here in Belgrade. Hope I am wrong.

    ReplyDelete
  12. It's good that other airports - Nis and/or Kraljevo can develop despite this concession.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think only Albania negotiated a deal where they restricted all other airports in the country to develop. Thankfully they managed to get out of that last year.

      Delete
  13. Good luck BEG.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I can't believe that it will take them until the end of 2018 to take over the airport. It will happen earlier surely.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Povuci-potegni faza moze potrajati i dulje.

      Delete
    2. ^There is not a single comment you have written today where you haven't communicated to us how everything will be a disaster. Take a break and focus on your own back yard.

      Delete
    3. Tko j3 spominjao katastrofu?

      Delete
  15. Well we can deduce that Air Serbia and Vinci will have a good relationship. I am interested to see which new airlines they will bring.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We can't deduce that at all, all we can deduce is that they'll have a forced relationship and whether it goes well or not depends on many factors. One thing for sure is that in their scenario assessment would have been an Air Serbia bankruptcy. After all, if Vucic dies tomorrow, who else is there to really stand behind them in such a concerted manner?

      Delete
    2. It may come as a surprise to you, but there is this thing called 'contract'. It is not dependent on someone being alive. There is also this thing called 'interest'. It was in previous governments interest to send Dinkic on a mission to find investor for JU and it will be very much in any future governments interest to keep Air Serbia alive. They might install a couple of party faithfuls, make a few minor changes and thats it.

      Delete
  16. This is their first airport investment in Europe outside of France and Portugal. Will be interesting to see how they develop. I think they will do a good job.

    ReplyDelete
  17. "intends on handling seven million passengers per year by 2024 and ten million by 2030"
    WTF? In 6 years the are planning only to add another 1.3 mln pax to BEG? This looks totally unserious.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree, they should cancel the tender.

      Delete
    2. LOL. Read the comments above.

      Delete
    3. Sorry 1.7 mln. pax, but still. I can't see why they are so conservative...

      Delete
    4. @11.28 no, they should padlock the airport while they are at it. It would make many people sleep easier at night around here.

      Delete
    5. Pretty much all the doom and gloom scenarios around the concession tender have proved false. And people are still trying to make this as some disaster. Just crazy.

      Delete
    6. Actually the passenger estimate is not mentioned by Vinci but by Vucic over the weekend.

      Delete
    7. That's because the Chinese were suppose to get in. By now we would have a new terminal, a second runway and ten million passengers.

      Delete
    8. I do hope you are being sarcastic.

      Delete
    9. Duh. Of course I was.

      Delete
    10. You never know around here :D

      Delete
    11. I mean that next year SOF will hit the 7 mln. pax without even going to concession. I think the concession mut bring far bigger increase in passenger numbers.

      Delete
    12. So you think if BEG has growth of say 10% each year, Vinci will close the door at some point and say they are not accepting new passengers because it will be over the conservative target Vucic announced on TV since Vucic wants to come on TV in 2022 and say how the target has been significantly exceeded?

      Delete
    13. Of course not. Just saying that I'm surprised by the low target they have put. No bad feelings...

      Delete
    14. The only difference is that Bulgaria is in the EU and since 2007 millions of its citizens have moved to other parts of the Union.
      On top of that, Ryanair and Wizz Air are fighting for domination at SOF meaning that fares have gone to unrealistically low levels.

      Before all this SOF was growing at a slower but more realistic pace, just like BEG is.

      Delete
    15. apples and pears....SOF is not a transfer airport, BEG is, you can't compare the two.
      Additionally.. the national carrier there is much weaker than AS, so there is more space for LCC, cheaper tickets and respectively more passangers

      Delete
    16. Aren't transfer airports supposed to have more traffic?

      Delete
    17. So, SOF has weaker national carrier, but lower fares and more pax?

      Sounds like you actually don't need a national carrier?

      Delete
    18. Thanks to a national carrier over 1000 people have a job in Serbia. That's 1000 famillies. For a country like Serbia, that is important. Again you are comparing a country which has been in the EU for over 10 years with Serbia. You are comparing it to a countty in which people could not travel visa free within Europe just 7 years ago. It is shocking that Sofia has not surpassed Belgrade years ago not just now.

      Delete
    19. So why not have 10.000 people employed in Air Serbia, if it's good for the country's well being? We've all seen how this "everybody needs to have a job even though if he's useless and doesn't do all day" mentality played well for Yugoslavia in the 70's and 80's. The country ended up completely bankrupt.

      The problem is that this parasitic political projects are playing on the supposedly-level playing field with run-for-profit companies. Imagine you and your neighbour both have a supermarket and you are selling the same goods, but he is 50% subsidies by the government, so he can perhaps lower the prices by 20-30% and he will still be in the green + more people will buy at his place, so even better. Tough luck if you are not a government-sponsored company, right?

      Delete
    20. You must be from W6 or FR? They all want to get 3eur passenger fee thats below cost, they want airport monopolies or near monopolies, they dont want to invest millions in airport infrastructure, they dont want to offer needed long haul flights and transfer connections and worst of all they dont want to move HQ to Belgrade and pay taxes there? Well no wonder you are upset with concession decision that will not be in favor of W6&FR for a while. Go to ZAG and complain there.

      Delete
    21. Why would an airline invest into airport infrastructure? It's up to airport to provide sufficient infrastructure, and to finance this through passenger/cargo tax and other revenue (shop rents, etc.). If airport cannot provide infrastructure, airlines/pax will go somewhere else.

      Every business in a free economy can choose what they want to do, and usually they make their decisions based on profitability, not on the future elections, political image etc. as is the case with government-owned national carriers. So if FR/W6/EZY deem long haul to be economically unviable for them, who can force them to go into this part of airline business?

      I couldn't care less about W6/FR/ZAG/BEG to be honest. The only point I was trying to make that there are airlines who can cause a significant increase in pax (good for local tourism sector, airport, etc.), while lowering the fares (good for pax) and still make a profit (good for owners/investors).

      In case of political project-national carriers (i.e. not airlines run as profitable business), Air Serbia for example, fares are high, airport has to even write off debts to the airline, and profit/revenue is very low at 0.3%, while typical European LCC achieves north of 15%.

      Delete
    22. u USA je drzava ulozili milijarde u avio infrastukturu posle i u aviokompanije. Slicno je i sa Nemackom Britanjom i Francuskom. Takvi mudrijasi piju Ceski Badvajzer, stede u Hypo Alpe Adriji, slecu na aerodrome Pariza, telefoniraju sa Telenorove mreze, skoluju se na stipendiji KfW, lete sa LOTom, sipaju benzin na MOL pumpama sve drzavnim preduzecima.

      Delete
    23. Airline business is not a free economy, it is a regulated market globally with bilaterals, rules and heavy government influence. LCC are only after profit and could not care less about infrastructure, country needs, less profitable routes or anything else. LCCs are among worst eco offenders as they unlock new market segment that does not need or want to travel at all, but will travel just because it is extremely cheap. If benefits of LCCs were as good as you would like us to believe, governments around the world would already shut down LH, DL, AA, AF, KL and let FR, W6 and the likes roam free.

      Delete
    24. Airline business is "not free economy" only in 3rd world, my friend!

      Delete
  18. "extension and upgrade of the EXISTING terminal and runway"

    so 700mil€ and no new terminal and runway. where will that money go?
    my guess would be hotel, shopping mall etc, upgrade of cargo terminal...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. You are reading way too much into their first press release. They need to financially close the deal before they can announce in detail their investments and they said they plan to financially close it by the end of the year.

      Delete
    2. let's wait & see.

      imho, if they put that "existing" on that infographic, it is reasonable to assume that there is no new terminal or runway in the binding offer.

      Delete
    3. The government has already said that the new concessionaire is obligated to build a new terminal.

      Delete
    4. but that does not mean they have to start building it in the first year of their concession since it is not necessary. They first need to expand and upgrade some of the areas in the existing terminal and then in 2-3 years they can start building a new one.

      Delete
    5. Also people should not compare this concession to Zagreb's. ZAG needed a new terminal badly. Apart from the fact that the old terminal had exceeded capacity it was a shoe box in all respects with no air bridges and lacking many key facilities and some airline did not want to fly there purely because of the facilities.

      Delete
    6. in the official statements after they anounced vinci i never noticed "new terminal"

      let me know if there is something about it. i watched the vučić/brnabić press conference

      Delete
    7. Whoever has been to BEG will know that Vinci will build a new terminal. The current one is small, crowded and simply outdated.

      Maybe they are not rushing to build it because first they need to move the cargo area to make room for the terminal expansion.

      Delete
    8. Come on guys, don't make any final conclusions based on infographic from first short press release.
      They had to publish something, agreement is not ye signed etc. - only things that anybody will put in such article are either well known facts or some fluffy talk about future. Nobody will put some "hard coded" promises in such short PR article.

      Delete
    9. Defining minimum requirements for a new terminal (size, gates, functions) and date by when it must be operational (for example Jan 1 2024) can be specified in concession agreement. New terminal in the next 5-6 years will enable Vinci to increase non-aviation revenue from low 20% to high 30s% or even low 40% and increase number of passengers. New terminal built sooner rather than later will give Vinci opportunity for greater ROI. Imagine building a new terminal after 15-20 years and then having only 5-10 years to recoup those costs, LOL. New terminal is coming soon as it makes financial sense.

      Delete
    10. huh, you guys really think we will be getting a new terminal?
      lets see, lets see

      location of that terminal is also going to be debatable.

      current development plans foresee terminal and new runway to the south-west of existing ones.

      Delete
    11. Petar one possible version for the first 5 years is to modify existing terminal, add new GA platform and use existing GA area as new remote stands A11-A15, and squeeze in a new runway between current runway and a current taxiway, plus some rapid exits. That would give them quick and cheap results but will damage long term needs for a new terminal and a remote second runway.

      Delete
    12. if they are targeting 10mil by 2030 that's my guess as well. refurbish A gates, extend C gates even more. that would sufficient for 10mil.
      and then turn old tower and flight operations building into hotel and some additional commercial space

      Delete
  19. 10 million by 2030 is way too conservative. I'm sure BEG will hit that by 2025 and by 2030 it will probably be handling between 15 and 20 million. Great times are yet to come for BEG, and hell would it be today if only Yugoslavia didn't collapse. BEG would already have at least two runways and march shoulder to shoulder with VIE, ATH etc.

    ReplyDelete
  20. No BEG, u tom slucaju, ne bi bio jedini aerodrom u zemlji.

    ReplyDelete
  21. QR is upgrading Belgrade service to 321:
    Doha – Belgrade eff 25MAR18 A321 replaces A320, 1 daily

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That has been announced a while ago.

      But what I can share is that at a recent Qatari state celebration in Serbia, I exchanged a few words with a QR Executive who told me that BEG has improved drastically for them and that it is very likely that BUD, ZAG and BEG will go widebody in S19, with odd capacity additions on ''when required'' basis. He also mentioned that SOF is progressing well.

      Delete
    2. BUD will go widebody already in S18:

      Doha – Budapest QR199/200 operational aircraft changes, A320 replaced by following:
      25MAR18 – 31JUL18 A321
      01AUG18 – 27OCT18 A330-200 (Selected dates by -300 in Oct 2018)

      Delete
    3. I'd rather have QR upgrade BEG to double daily than a daily widebody.

      Delete
    4. U svakom slucaju, Fata je Fata al 2 put je 2 put

      Delete
    5. I certainly doubt ZAG will go wide-body now that there's Emirates there.

      Delete
  22. zasto Pruger ne komenrarise?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. pretpostavljam da kuca članak za sutra

      Delete
  23. The 25-year concession contract covers financing, operation, maintenance, extension and upgrade of the existing airport terminal and runways. Does this mean that Vinci is not obliged to build a new terminal and runway?

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

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.