JetSetting88
Intern
- Joined
- Jul 16, 2012
- Posts
- 58
Well yes, exactly my point, they still don't have to FRONT the cost though.But quite often a new road/bridge/tunnel will have a high toll... so perhaps BAC should absorb the cost for now and increase taxes when its built!
As for how much they make on parking, assuming they didn't need that cash for anything else, after 10 years they'd still be half a billion short (assuming $1.3 billion is the correct figure). That said, isn't their master plan to add businesses and office space to the airport precinct... so they'll make it back and they know that!
And considering parking only equates for 18% of their revenue, thats pretty damn good.
Either way, whether BAC or the airlines pay for it, the cost is still going to be passed onto the consumers. It just shouldn't be up to the airlines. Why should Qantas/VA/whoever pay upfront now for infrastructure they cannot use (which will be absorbed by increased fares) and then most likely to be charged a higher usage fee in the future when the runway becomes operational.
A report by the credit rating agency Moody's late last year said BAC had enough funds to cover its planned developments this year, including starting dredging for the new runway.
"At 30 June 2012, the airport held cash of approximately $124 million, with undrawn bank facilities amounting to approximately $300 million, which, with cash from operations, provides ample coverage of projected FY13 capital expenditure of approximately $260 million," it said.