Originally Posted by
percysmith
Well at least Singapore and Japan (Narita) don't insist on bilaterals for its airport.
UK moved on.
One that has to meet all the stupid PPB rules from shipping law and have sufficient red backing (the Chinese type, not the red roo one).
That's the idea. That's not the practice.
Don't get me wrong - CX/KA is not a regulated monopoly to the extent that HKE/CLP is.
But certainly Govt (especially this one) is not in a hurry to change things. Which means except on a handful of routes, we have pretty cozy duopolies.
I hope there is some change when we get the third runway, more towards Singapore's direction with their liberal air services policy (any govt spending there arguably helps new entrants more than the flag carrier).
But if the status quo is perpetuated for allocation of slots for the third runway then CX is going to get the lion's share of benefit but not the proportionate cost.
No one doubt that current policy favors CX at certain extent which is common in current aviation business and it is not subsidy!
It does not change the fact that the third runway is funded by AAHk revenue and additional levy. Cx bears the largest part of that.