Bengaluru International Airport (BIAL) Discussions

[raghussc]

Originally Posted by Devesh

Ahhh......back to the contract is "inviolable" argument. I think we have been around this a few times.



From what I have been hearing from various sources, many airlines are not interested in operating from HAL. What is your basis of making your statement ? Please share with us some if you have some other info that is suggesting otherwise.

Devesh .. can u please elaborate on the bolded text ?

[Devesh]

Originally Posted by vvr

In response to someone on another forum who was blowing some smoke on this choice thingy and how we should break this BIAL monopoly, I wrote this:

Since we are on a roll here. Why can’t I choose which electric company I get electricity from for the 10 hours or so a day that we do get erractic and hazardous electricity; why can’t I choose which water supply company that I get my contaminated water from; which garbage company that I choose not to collect garbage from my street. The possibilities are endless. Oh, by the way, when we break the backs of these monopolies, will someone help me break the Presswallah cartel that operates in my neighborhood. Speaking of cartels, I heard a wild allegation the other day that there is flyover-building cartel operating in Bangalore – nah, not possible".

Yes you can. Check my earlier post on this. With the exception of water, you can have your choice.

[Devesh]

Originally Posted by 2Paise

This is a rendering of the hotel u/c opposite the airport terminal

This looks great. It would be good if BIAL provides a covered walkway from the terminals to the hotel.

With all the glass, I hope they are using PVB double paned for sound insulation, or the guests wont get a wink of sleep.

[Devesh]

Originally Posted by mailabode

Sorry, But Devesh ji does not travel in a tent in whatever maybe its shape, unless it is of the AAI brand.

I am very simple person in that regards. Gareeb aadmi hoon. Don't have some big MNC or Indian corporate footing my travel bills. Drive to BIAL in my little Santro or take the Vayu Vajra. Normally return in a Vayu Vajra or Airlift.

I have no issues with BIAL as an airport. It is good. Its efficient. I am happy with the plain terminal that others say lack architectural flair. To me, all that fluff does not matter.

Q,C,D,S and VFM does.

Been through enough tents. But for BIAL to construct a "temporary" terminal, while demanding a UDF from me. Sorry, that is hosing me, as a consumer, and as a believer in the free market, I want that choice; not for the choice itself, but for what it represents. Some modicum of freedom from monopoly.

[Devesh]

Originally Posted by mailabode

Yes Devesh, you sure have said in the past "i am the expert" or "i am the avaiation expert" when someone was putting up counter arguments on Praja/SSC during the opening stages of BIA. It was all too open a claim from you then, and am not going to be searching for it to prove as evidence. I wouldnt be surprised if you went and deleted that post of yours wherever it is - just like you deleted your post which made a false claim about smaller and larger arcrafts's landing and takeofftimes(after someone else had questioned it).

Go fly a kite, and stop resorting to character assassination.

[Devesh]

Originally Posted by raghussc

Also, Delhi may not have second airport within 150km .. Mumbai's second airport is still a thought, and stuck in clearances ... ditto with chennai and commies will never get it right in kolkata ...

Talking about Delhi. Read the news articles about the new Runway 11-29. Pretty cool. Only problem is the drainage of the sewage setup. I hope they get that fixed soon.

http://www.hindu.com/2008/08/22/stor...2260771400.htm
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/D...ow/3391038.cms
http://www.redorbit.com/news/busines...unway_flooded/

[Devesh]

Originally Posted by amaku

Perhaps you should examine the books of Indian Airlines/Air India, that will answer your question. And yes, any sane businessman would shut them down without thinking twice. The govt. took over a profitable, well-respected airline and mis-managed it into the ground

I agree with you. However, the mis-management started only about 25 years after the government took it over. Late '70s early from the time of Indira Gandhi and compounded by every successive government, regardless of political party.

Even today, AI and IC suffer because of the super excessive interference of the darn babus and netas, and them stuffing their cohorts in to the airline roles.

Better to sell them off before they are totally run in to the ground.

[Devesh]

Originally Posted by rohank

I hope & wish this is going to be 100% true; this is a report from today's Livemint
Link:http://www.livemint.com/2008/08/2023...y-no-case.html

“Bial is not agreeing at all to commercial operations at the HAL airport. They are not even allowing Haj operations (flights from the old airport),” he said.

Considering that GoI subsidises the Haj flights with a fixed ticket price and all additional costs are subsidised, this is more subsidy that we taxpayers will have to bear, since BIAL will want their UDF.

Drifting off topic, this subsidy game (in general), including PDS, needs to be radically overhauled. Its the netas and their chamchas who are fleecing all of us, and raking it in.

Ideally, a "food voucher" program where the government gives a fixed amount of money every month to BPL families with a ration card. The family can use the vouchers like cash to purchase supplies at market prices.

[Devesh]

Originally Posted by raghussc

Devesh .. can u please elaborate on the bolded text ?

Raghu, many airlines do not want to incur the additional cost and burden of split operations at two airports. It could be for a multitude of reasons.

1. They do not have enough flights to justify it.
2. They do not want to deal with the hassle.
3. They do not want to antagonise BIAL. (Mr. Brunner has a reputation in this regard).
4. They want to position their brand correctly. Upmarket vs. Low Cost.

etc.

[raghussc]

Originally Posted by Devesh

Been through enough tents. But for BIAL to construct a "temporary" terminal, while demanding a UDF from me. Sorry, that is hosing me, as a consumer, and as a believer in the free market, I want that choice; not for the choice itself, but for what it represents. Some modicum of freedom from monopoly.

What if BIAL excludes pax flying out of that temporary terminal from paying UDF ?

[vvr]

Originally Posted by Devesh

Same to you VVR. You want your choice of airport but are unwilling to give me mine.

You are assuming the 7:45am Jet flight will operate from HAL. In a market driven system, that could happen if Jet gets more passengers or profits from HAL originated flight and not adequate from BIAL flights. But looking at the number of BIAL supporters here on SSC, that should not happen.

Puts a lot the claims with regards to private sector, better airport, and free market theory, to test now doesn't it.

But more seriously, from discussions within the airline sector, I have a feeling that airlines will not shift or split operations that easily. It might land up that the LCCs will choose HAL due to the low cost approach and FSCs will stay at BIAL.

1. I am not the one who is advocating choice in the matter of airports, you are. "Choice" is the cornerstone of your argument to keep HAL open. And yet what you offer is at best is faux choice. As has been said ad nauseam here, we don't have choice in picking our railway stations , bus stations, utility companies (your protestation notwithstanding), why should we demand this choice in picking airports? This has been my (and many others here) position all along -- nothing disingenuous about it.

2. There is no such thing as a level playing field with a government-run entity in the fray. It isn't the case with oil retailing, it isn't the case with communications (even though BSNL does not know what to do with the leg up it has been given). So you never know, what tricks AAI may conjure up to gain an advantage. Free market in many instances in an India reeling from 60 years of public sector dominance is a mirage.

3. Why will Airlines not shift or split operations? An answer might be inefficiency. This what the argument about a single facility is all about.

[vvr]

Originally Posted by Devesh

Raghu, many airlines do not want to incur the additional cost and burden of split operations at two airports. It could be for a multitude of reasons.

1. They do not have enough flights to justify it.
2. They do not want to deal with the hassle.
3. They do not want to antagonise BIAL. (Mr. Brunner has a reputation in this regard).
4. They want to position their brand correctly. Upmarket vs. Low Cost.

etc.

Could efficiency, productivity, ROI and other major free market buzzwords be other reasons? May be they simply prefer BIAL to HAL. I don't hobnob with the heads of airline companies, so I do not know for sure.

[mailabode]

Originally Posted by Devesh

Go fly a kite, and stop resorting to character assassination.

"Fly a kite" ? - OIC.
Lets examine why:
I addressed a comment not to you but to someone else. You reply to me(i.e, you ask me a question) in response to my communication to someone else. And only at your request did i give you a reply which you did not like(truth was bitter). And so i should fly a kite?. Just who do you think you are? - you think people are slaves and they should talk when you like and shut up when you dont like. Sorry man, we dont live in the 18th or 19th century and you can make people dance to your tunes in your mungerilal dreams only. Because you lie and cannot take respinsibility for your statement "I am the avaiation expert" - i cant dance to yout tunes- you should deal with your 'lying and megalomania issues' yourself.

Thanks for revealing that you also are capable of being an "a*****e".

What character assaination?- oic lots of character in dishonest lobbying nowdays? .
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

You have lied before and i have asked you questions which you did not reply to (when its inconvenient you decide to ignore). You have deleted posts where your claims were wrong. You did claim "you were the avaiation expert" to counter somebody. At least i am only saying something you said openly on Praja or SSC, not based on something spoken secretly and in private - did you corroborate your "CEO's were shaking the head" reel story which incidentally you too quite far? - what a hypocrite. I am not the only person aware of what you do. Nobody spoils your "image" or assasinates your "character" more than yourself- by what i believe is your dishonesty.

[vvr]

Originally Posted by Devesh

Yes you can. Check my earlier post on this. With the exception of water, you can have your choice.

My feeble brain is already overloaded with facts and figures. Can you point to a specific message where you talk about the choice one has in buying electricity and garbage disposal services?

[yshak]

Originally Posted by Devesh

Ahhh......back to the contract is "inviolable" argument. I think we have been around this a few times.
.

Arrgg! I did not say the contract is "inviolable". I said changing the contract after someone has invested over 2500cr is unfair.

Since you have this pompous attitude claiming that your $1bn CEO pals can easily buy a company like BIAL & Zurich airport, do you mind asking them if they will be okay when the vendor they signed the contract with suddenly out of the blue wants to change the terms which totally jeopardizes their investments?

While you are at it ask them to make an offer to buyout Siemens stake in BIAL, I'm quite sure Siemens will offload their stake, and you & your CEO pals can run BIAL however you want, maybe build another lane called "$1bn CEO's only " beside the "VIP only" lane. Jeeeez!

[mailabode]

Originally Posted by vvr

My feeble brain is already overloaded with facts and figures. Can you point to a specific message where you talk about the choice one has in buying electricity and garbage disposal services?

I wont be surprised if this man claims he wants two state governments that compete with each other so that he can choose which he likes because its his fundamental right.

He thinks building two airports just to have a choice of which one he can use, is just like choosing which airline we want to fly with to go to the same destination - irrespective of if the total capacity of the two airports is double the current demand. And such wastage in a country that is poor and coming from a chair of the BCIC - God save this country. For a self styled "aviation expert" who claims to have had avaiation expertise - i wonder if his former "avaiation employer" in the US knows the what he is doing now (in this regard) based on that past professional experience.

[barrykul]

Originally Posted by Devesh

Sources - Check public records. Use the RTI. Find out the ownership of the terminal.

The Onus is on you pal to prove glib stmts, not me. I am sure the sale did not happen. You have to prove otherwise since you asserted the sale.

I fail to see the connection of your statement.

Figures. I rest my case!!!

You want choice of airports.

Good lord, no I don't want the cowshed called HAL.

So do I. I am not proposing closing down BIAL to open HAL. I am saying run both together.

This is not your grandfather's airports to propose both. The grand poobah of GoI has already determined that the airport is closed for commercial ops. So there you go. You have no say in the matter.

[barrykul]

vvr, mailabode and others. I think we all need to start flying kites with Devesh's help of course. I think we need all the hot air generated by open "HAL" airport folks to propel our kites. Maybe we will win the gold in Kite flying at the olympics one day, suitably aided by crooked communists by rigging our true age qualification.

Free choice and market forces. I did not know that Bluru has free choice in electricity, when the city is reeling under power cuts frequently. Where can I sign up 24x7 supply. And airport choices, give me a break. We have had to deal with the monopoly called GoI and AAI thus far. BIAL is private and free from the clutches of the monopoly. The communist thugish cabal is hammering away at such freedom. AAI leeches are resorting to strikes. Communists wave red flags in support of AAI.

[mailabode]

From Asia Times - 27 June, 2003.

Why India's economy lags behind China's
By Ramtanu Maitra

The on-going six-day trip to China by the Indian Prime Minister Atal Bihari Vajpayee that ends on Friday contains many elements, but one of the major objectives will be to improve India-China economic relations.

In tow with Vajpayee are business leaders from 100 of the biggest Indian companies, including one of India's top five, software developer Infosys Technologies Ltd. The biggest tractor maker, Mahindra and Mahindra; the largest drug manufacturer, Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd and the top cement manufacturer, Grasim Industries Ltd, are accompanying the premier. These industries represent the areas in which India enjoys an edge over its Chinese counterparts, and New Delhi expects to pull off business deals of benefit to India.

The comparison
Comparing the Indian economy with the Chinese economy has become almost a pastime for many analysts. A majority of these economic analysts have come to the conclusion that as of the year 2003, China is well ahead of India. As The Economist of London titled its recent cover story on the subject: "India V China: A Tiger, Falling Behind a Dragon."

China's relative success over India in attracting foreign direct investment (FDI) was what tipped the balance for The Economist, although the article points out that China's figures are "inflated by 'round-tripping' of domestic investment through Hong Kong". At the same time, The Economist notes, some Indian economists claim that India's FDI figures are understated, because "they exclude foreigners' reinvested profits, the proceeds of foreign stock market listings, intra-company loans, trade credits, financial leases, and so on".

The second criterion cited by The Economist is the respective growth rates of the two countries. Decidedly, China's growth rates are much higher than India's. But the article points to some Indian businessmen and policy makers who angrily claim that China, being under a dictatorial government, cooks its books and presents a much rosier picture of its economy than reality warrants. India, with a democratic system, cannot resort to such official chicanery.

The Economist concludes that India's economic backwardness has little to do with democracy as such, but has a lot to do with corruption, fiscal mismanagement, a lack of international ambition and a history of over-protection at home. On the surface, the argument is cogent, but it is also true that corruption in China is similarly high and often, if not always, fiscal mismanagement is another face of corruption.

Significantly, however, The Economist report did not look at the respective country's investments in the physical sectors - such as manpower development, health, power, water management, railroads, roads and highways, communication etc - and hence remains highly superficial and gossipy. A comparison of investments by China and India in their respective physical economic sectors over the past two decades would have made it very clear why China is surging ahead, and India is not. It must, however, be said that India's growth rate in recent years, for which the Vajpayee government hardly deserves any credit, though highly inadequate, was better than most distressed economies of the world.

Skewed investments
In the 1990s, following the opening up of the Indian economy with the intent of inviting foreign direct investment, foreign investors were given an open invitation. As a result, investment was concentrated in consumer durable sectors where it is quick-yielding and withdrawal is very easy. This exemplifies the fly-by-night nature of many foreign investors.

As was pointed out by Indian Planning Commission member Dr S P Gupta at a memorial lecture two years ago, India now must encourage foreign investment with a priority in infrastructure. There investment is of a long-term nature and the amount of investment needed is very high. The Indian private sector finds it very difficult to enter such heavy investment areas.

Similar views were expressed by a senior World Bank economist recently. "Since 1991, India has had a policy of attracting private investment into infrastructure," said India country director Edwin Lim, speaking at a conference in New Delhi. "While some progress has been made, India's demands for infrastructure services are still not being met. If the private sector is to play a big role in meeting India's infrastructure demands, then India needs sectoral policies and a regulatory framework that are conducive to private investment."

Since India opened up to foreign investment in the early 1990s, there has been some economic expansion. But there has been little parallel investment by successive governments in the power industry or other critical infrastructure such as railways, airlines, highways and telecommunications.

Decrepit infrastructure
A World Bank report issued almost three years ago said, "The shortage of power is estimated at about 10 percent of total electrical energy and roughly 20 percent of peak capacity requirement." Fifty years after independence, many rural areas are still without electricity. Even measured against neighboring countries, India's per capita electricity consumption is very low - 270 kilowatt hours/year as compared to 300 for Pakistan and 480 for China.

Perhaps no single issue excites Indian industrialists more than the subject of erratic power supply. Indian small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs), the backbone of India's manufacturing and industrial employment, are now reeling under pressure from imports. "We do not want protection," says Y P Suri, secretary of the Federation of Associations of Small Industries of India, an apex body representing SMEs. "All we want is support in terms of infrastructure."

From padlocks to electrical appliances, Chinese goods have made a mass entry into Indian markets. Chinese electrical goods flooding the Delhi market have forced over 250 units in the capital to close shop. "How can you compare us with China?" asks Suri. "Can the Indian government guarantee us the same kind of power supply that Chinese SMEs get?"

With more than 3.3 million small-scale units spread across the country and with over 18 million people employed in them, SMEs are India's second largest employer - after agriculture. But, according to the Ministry of Small Scale Industries, more than 300,000 SMEs have been sick since March 2000.

While the power shortage in India is for all to see, including those foreigners who travel only by air, India's railroads have been in a mess for decades now. At least 14 million people ride each day on the world's second largest railway system, which stretches 66,800 miles, zig-zagging up and down and across India.

"Freight traffic volume has gone up by 620 percent and passenger traffic by 514 percent since 1951, while input into increasing capacity has grown by only 200 percent," said M K Mishra, a former member of the Indian Railway board. The higher load has increased pressure on railway staff and affected safety on a state-run network inherited from the country's British colonial masters at independence in 1947. Railroad accidents have become a daily affair and, like terrorist killings in the state of Jammu and Kashmir, the deaths in railroad accidents do not raise any hue and cry from the people. No rail minister opts to resign any more. The death toll in train accidents has gone up significantly because, experts say, the outdated equipment combined with sub-standard parts on rail coaches make the railways more vulnerable to such accidents. At the same time, rail budgets have been decreasing. And the priority for every railway minister is adding a new train that connects his or her own constituency to Delhi or Mumbai or some other metro.

Ever since the Narasimha Rao government in 1991 embarked on its "liberalization" policy, the power sector has been systematically starved of funds. Not only has the private sector failed to contribute to production capacity in any significant way, but investment in transmission and maintenance of existing plants has seen catastrophic declines. As a result, even when new plants are commissioned, the problem of poor transmission networks remains.
One area where the neglect of infrastructure over the decades is most apparent is in the nation's roads network. Only 2 percent of Indian roads are four-lane, 34 percent are two-lane, and 64 percent are single-lane. Much of the problem is due to the fact that India has been spending less and less on road infrastructure. India's first five-year plan (1951-56) spent 1.4 percent of its total outlay on roads. The share gradually declined, to a mere 0.6 percent in the eighth five-year plan (1992-97). Even after 50 years of independence, nearly 50 percent of Indian villages are yet to be connected by all-weather roads.

The Rakesh Mohan Committee estimated in 2001 that the economic cost of bad roads ranges from Rs 200 billion (US$4.3 billion) to Rs 300 billion annually. External assistance is being obtained for the improvement of national highways through international agencies such as the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank and the Overseas Economic Cooperation of Japan. This is one area the Vajpayee administration has paid attention to, and is investing in quite liberally.

A similar weakness is all too visible in the Indian port system. Decrepit and bogged down by lack of modernization, Indian ports are a nightmares to importers. The old state-run Mumbai port is a classic example: it suffers from inefficiency, poor draught, low productivity, high costs and long vessel turnaround times. Mumbai's inadequacies have benefited Colombo in Sri Lanka, which is enjoying growing container volumes.

Efforts to develop India's ports have all too often been stymied by the creaking bureaucracy. For example, recent bureaucratic problems encountered in the private tendering processes at Mundra in northwestern India and in the conversion of two break bulk berths to a new container terminal at Nava Mumbai under the Jawaharlal Nehru Port Trust have slowed down the development of ports in India.

Conclusion
In contrast to India's neglect of the basic infrastructure, China is investing its surplus in railroad, power, road and water management in a concerted way. There is no question that China still lacks adequate infrastructure, but it has understood clearly the importance of modernizing its basic infrastructure to generate employment and adequate utilization of its vast population.

Indian policy makers, and some economists, on the other hand, give the impression that India's strategy to accelerate growth is to leapfrog past technologies through its information technology (IT) acumen. India's services sector has seen a steady increase in growth rates, share of GDP and contribution to GDP growth. More than half of India's GDP growth in the 1990s came from the growth of the services sector.

It is one thing to applaud the contribution of IT - with its minimal requirement for infrastructure - to the Indian economy at this time. It is quite another matter, and potentially disastrous, to pretend that boosting IT is a development strategy. IT cannot move a slow-moving economy, burdened with a massive shortfall of infrastructural development, a huge number of illiterates, crippling poverty and very high unemployment and under-employment. As the International Finance Corporation's 2001 report, "Leapfrogging India's Information Technology Industry and the Internet," put it, "while the technology offers considerable promise for India, it will have to be combined with more widespread reforms if the promise is to be realized."

The real bad news lies elsewhere. India's agricultural sector, which continues to employ about 60 percent of the country's workforce, has seen a real decline in terms of its contribution to GDP growth and its share of GDP. India's industrial sector has not been able to replicate the growth magic of the services sector either. While industry's share of GDP has increased over the years, its growth rate dropped in the 1990s and its contribution to GDP growth has more or less remained constant over the years. Data show that six major industry groups - food products, cotton textiles, textile products, wood, paper and basic metal and alloy industries - have experienced a sharp slowdown over the past four years.

Overall, as industrial development was divorced from efficiency and productivity, India's ability to compete globally has been seriously compromised. By contrast, during the same period, Chinese manufacturers became increasingly competitive. Infrastructure has made all the difference.

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/EF27Df04.html

[dis.agree]

Originally Posted by Devesh

But more seriously, from discussions within the airline sector, I have a feeling that airlines will not shift or split operations that easily. It might land up that the LCCs will choose HAL due to the low cost approach and FSCs will stay at BIAL.

umm, i don't know about that. if both the airports are allowed to run and if airlines are allowed to bid, i think HAL airport would attract more money per flight and i would think FSC would bid for HAL and LCC would bid for BIAL. but then i doubt this would ever happen. there are commercial contracts and they have to honored. unless bial is compensated to allow hal to function or if bial owners are stupid.

my impressions about bial was it is a very efficient airport, spacious enough and as good as any in the world. it is a small airport but then so is traffic. they seem to have a buffer space between international & domestic areas and i was guessing depending on time of day, they allow intl/domestic passenger use that buffer - simple & smart.

people have compared changi airport. changi singapore airport is very spacious. infact too spacious i found only about 10-20% was used during morning hours. those environment conscious types should protest to get changi airport use the space better and cut down on energy it consumes to keep such empty spaces air-conditioned.