1 / 20

Privatisation and Financial Performance of European Airports

Privatisation and Financial Performance of European Airports. Dr. Hans-Arthur Vogel. Content. Financial performance of 35 European commercial airports (1990 – 2000) Evaluation of partial factor productivity (PFP), financial ratio (FRA) and data envelopment analysis (DEA)

nimrod
Download Presentation

Privatisation and Financial Performance of European Airports

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Privatisation and Financial Performance of European Airports Dr. Hans-Arthur Vogel

  2. Content • Financial performance of 35 European commercial airports (1990 – 2000) • Evaluation of partial factor productivity (PFP), financial ratio (FRA) and data envelopment analysis (DEA) • Comparison between public owned, privatised and partially privatised airports

  3. Definitions of Ownership Structure • Public Ownership: No involvement of private parties • Partially Privatised: Requires a minimum private share >= 20% with regard to total equity or a lease or concession agreement with a similar risk profile • Fully Privatised: Long-term private risk investment in terms of a substantial equity stake >= 75%, long-term lease or concession agreement, or a BOT franchise

  4. Sample Airports

  5. Methodology • Financial metrics  emphasises profitability or return rates • Productivity measures  relationship between inputs and outputs • An independent and a related t-test  significance of results

  6. Defintions of Performance Indicators and Financial Ratios

  7. Results of Independent t-Test • Statistically significant or highly significant differences (95% and 99% confidence level respectively) between publicly owned and privatised airports for 20 out of 28 ratios • No statistically significant difference: non-aeronautical share of total revenue, return on capital employed, EBITDA margin, return on equity, etc.

  8. Results of Independent Means t-Test

  9. Results of Dependent t-Test • Partially privatised: ADR, BRS, CPH, HAJ, NAP and VIE • Fully privatised: BFS, CWL and EMA • Assess financial performance before and after privatisation • Statistically significant (95% confidence level) for 12 out of 28 ratios

  10. Results of Dependent t-Test

  11. Data Envelopment Analysis • DEA scores are overall indices of (in)efficiency of the individual sample airports relative to each other • Financial efficiency model was used • Consistent findings of the two t-tests are confirmed by the results of total factor productivity in terms of DEA • Indicates econmies of scale  < 4 mill terminal passengers per annum • Diseconomies of scale  > 4 mill

  12. Data Envelopment Analysis • VRS: small and medium-sized sample airports operate under increasing returns to scale (IRS) • VRS: airports and airport systems with traffic volumes in excess of > 3-4 mill terminal passengers operate under either constant (CRS) or decreasing returns to scale (DRS)

  13. Mean Annual DEA Scores

  14. Data Envelopment Analysis • Scale efficiency value of 1  no effect of scale size on productivity • The lower the value of scale efficieny under 1, the more adverse the impact of scale size • Airport sample  trend of decreasing scale efficiency in parallel to increasing traffic volume

  15. Mean Annual DEA Scores per Ownership Group (VRS)

  16. DEA Scores (Results) • Higher efficiency in terms of DEA for partially and fully privatised airports

  17. Value Driver Scorecard of Sample Airports

  18. The Roots of Key Value Drivers and their Effect on Returns

  19. Balance Sheet Structure of Sample Airports 1990 – 1999 (Mean Values)

  20. Conclusion • DEA scores based on financial variables  provide airport management with a useful tool to identify their relative position within the airport sector • PFP and FRA useful for investor  provide indications of the relative attractiveness of an airport as an potential investment • Economically meaningful and statiscally significant differences between publicly owned and privatised airports for the vast majority of tested measures

More Related