News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
 8.6K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 39K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
 4.9K     0 

The press release doesn't answer a key question - how is this investment being financed?

- Paul
Unless they can get the landlord (government) to pony up, I would expect it to be a combination of fees and debt.

No announcement for the transit terminal that GTAA has been discussing for a while?
The presser really just sounds like it is in relation to the airport property and operations itself. Assuming any proposed transit hub would be off-property, any talk about it would require other players.

I've long fantasized a solution to the traffic congestion by simply buying a large front end loader with a grapple and picking up the illegally parked cars - people and all - and simply dumping them into a nearby pit.
 
No announcement for the transit terminal that GTAA has been discussing for a while?

That was a commercial real-estate play for all those parking lots GTAA owns. The rapid rise of South Core was the inspiration: Union West really meant "West Core". Commercial real-estate, and business travel in general, aren't what they were 5 years ago. Regus, WeWork, LiquidOffice, etc. are not going to pay a premium for commercial space at an airport/railway station which frequent business travellers can use for meetings or as their HQ.

GTAA can't turn a profit building that type of infrastructure today, and frankly they're lucky it wasn't already under construction.
 
Last edited:
Making Pearson more "Green" is all well and good I'm sure, but it'll be putting lipstick on a pig if they don't significantly improve the passenger experience to one befitting of a growing global hub.
 
Unless they can get the landlord (government) to pony up, I would expect it to be a combination of fees and debt.

If the Federal government doesn't want to spend Tax-payer funds to improve Pearson, then it's time they sell off a portion of the airport to a private investor.
The current model of relying on raising fees to just tread water is broken, as Pearson already has some of the highest fees in the world yet relies on shipping containers as a path to some gates. Embarassing stuff.

Even selling 25% of the airport could net $4-5 billion towards redevelopment as Pearson was appraised at close to $15 billion in 2019.
 
Last edited:
If the Federal government doesn't want to spend Tax-payer funds to improve Pearson, then it's time they sell off a portion of the airport to a private investor.
The current model of relying on raising fees to just tread water is broken, as Pearson already has some of the highest fees in the world yet relies on shipping containers as path to some gates. Embarassing stuff.

Even selling 25% of the airport could net $4-5 billion towards redevelopment as Pearson was appraised at close to $15 billion in 2019.

Q: And how will a private interest raise the investment capital for the purchase and upgrading?

A: By charging fees

While everyone grumbles about the fees, it’s a good model because it is transparent around what the cost of operating the nation’s most important terminal really is. Sure, we could lower the cost of air tickets by subsidising the fees, but that money comes from the same source, ie the taxpayer, just less transparently

The moment the feds decide to offer a subsidy to lower the fees, we will be able to ask what the same amount would produce if invested in better rail
Service instead, thereby reducing the number if gate slots actually needed at Pearson.

- Paul
 
To be clear, the federal government owns the land. I don't know how much, if any, infrastructure they own. Much or all of the property that existed when it was a federal airport is long gone.

Even if it is just the land, the price tag would be steep, and how they would divvy up the property without subdividing or getting into a partnership with the government is beyond me.
 
No announcement for the transit terminal that GTAA has been discussing for a while?
IMG_5053.jpeg
 
No announcement for the transit terminal that GTAA has been discussing for a while?

The Feds and Province seem totally asleep at the wheel in recognizing how vital the Transit Hub would be to the region. At this point, a possible 2026 win by Crombie for the provincial premiership could be the only thing to breathe life into this proposal. With her background as Mississauga mayor you'd expect her to press for approval of the project as premier.
 
Q: And how will a private interest raise the investment capital for the purchase and upgrading?

A: By charging fees

While everyone grumbles about the fees, it’s a good model because it is transparent around what the cost of operating the nation’s most important terminal really is. Sure, we could lower the cost of air tickets by subsidising the fees, but that money comes from the same source, ie the taxpayer, just less transparently

The moment the feds decide to offer a subsidy to lower the fees, we will be able to ask what the same amount would produce if invested in better rail
Service instead, thereby reducing the number if gate slots actually needed at Pearson.

- Paul
Doesn't much of the fee revenue go to paying the federal government rent on the land?
 
The Feds and Province seem totally asleep at the wheel in recognizing how vital the Transit Hub would be to the region. At this point, a possible 2026 win by Crombie for the provincial premiership could be the only thing to breathe life into this proposal. With her background as Mississauga mayor you'd expect her to press for approval of the project as premier.

While potentially useful, the importance of the transit hub - especially considering the current trends - seems overstated at this point. I'd rather put the money into proper HF/SR in the Toronto/Montreal corridor.

AoD
 
A transit hub at Pearson makes sense and should be protected/planned for, but I agree that it isn't the highest priority at the moment.
 

Back
Top