Originally Posted by
CPH-Flyer
I did not see an SK comment yet. But I guess like with the LHR expansion and BA, they are worried about cost and increasing fees. Plus worried about increased capacity and competition.
There have been quite extensive reports about this in the media, and even conservative media do not present the airport in a very good light. The way it looks in the media (the way I read the situation), we have a large monopolistic actor on the market, who already stopped the plan to build a competing terminal trying to extend the current capacity. They say runway capacity is sufficient to double size (in terms of number of pax). Berlingske named extending the B finger (which BTW is already terribly long walk), and building an in-field/satellite terminal, where the cross-runway is right now.
The airlines are quite united against it. SK claims it will cost them 3-digit million amount yearly if CPH does this. The issue is that the runway to be closed is used rarely, but it is used in the situations when nothing else can be used, and on these days all flights will be pretty much grounded leaving the airlines with care costs and re-booking costs. The airport does not consider this being an expense caused by them.
This is the problem with the monopoly situation IMHO, the (rich) airport looks into significant expansion of profit, and all the actual cost of the operation is on the airlines, who are operating in a highly competitive market.
I honestly believe that the right thing to do, is to start planning a low cost airport in Copenhagen (whether at Kastrup or elsewhere) that does not depend on CPH economically and that could take some traffic of it. Not because CPH has no capacity, but because it would be really healthy for it to face some competition. I can totally understand (if not approve) SK's increasing focus on ARN and OSL, given the developments in Copenhagen over the last years.