Being the capital city airport, Esenboğa Airport plays an important role among the other airports of DHMİ General Directorate. The Esenboğa Airport New Domestic-International Lines Terminal Building and multi-story car park project went out to tender on 12 April, 2004 and the TAV Esenboğa Investment, Construction and Management Company won the project, giving an operation time of 15 years and 8 months. The 167,000 m2 terminal building in this project has a capacity of 10 million domestic and international passengers per year. It has 18 passenger gates, 105 check-in desks and a 4000 capacity multi-story car park. The total cost of this project is 188.7 million USD with an investment period of 36 months. The expiry operation date is 25 September, 2007.
International Terminal of Dalaman Airport
Upon the increase in the number of potential passengers, it is expected to open the 5 million passengers/year capacity terminal in 2006. The investment began in 29.07.2004 using the BOT model. Construction of the Dalaman Airport new international terminal building has begun. ATM Airport Construction and Management is the construction company of the project and their operation period is 6 years, 5 months and 20 days. The total cost of this project is 72.4 million USD. The investment period is 24 months. The expiry operation date is 30 July, 2006.
This project comprises a 95,587m2 enclosed areas with a capacity of 5 million passengers annually, a terminal building with 7 passenger gates, 60 check-in desks and a 1000 capacity multi-story car park.
International Terminal of İzmir Adnan Menderes Airport
Upon the increase in the number of potential passengers,it is expected to open the 5 million passengers/year capacity terminal in 2007. The investment began in 27.05.2005 using the BOT model. The construction company is İZMİR Adnan Menderes Airport International Terminal Construction Management and Investment, and their operation period is 6 years, 7 months and 29 days. The total cost of this project is 125 million USD with an investment period of 24 months. The expiry operation date is 27 May, 2007. This project comprises a 107,899 m2 enclosed area, with a capacity of 5 million passengers annually, a terminal building with 9 passenger gates, 60 check-in desks and a 2200 capacity car park.
CONCLUSION
There are a lot of benefits of BOT model in economical, commercial, political and social areas. It is possible to assert that one of the most important benefits of BOT model is to lessen the amount of burden and function of the government by giving the private sector the chance of investment requiring a good deal of financing.
The use of this model for high budget infrastructure investments is especially of benefit to the private sector. In spite of this, it is possible to use the public resources for the benefit of the government’s fundamental functions. Giving the second generation public service apart from the classical government services such as judgment, public peace, and outer security to the private enterprise in the frame of this model leads to a decrease in the government’s service burden and expenses; consequently it contributes to an increase in the income. In this way, in the sub case investments the proportion of the government will become less and advanced technology and foreign capital will pass to our country free-of-charge. Another benefit of the BOT model is it arises in the direction of multiplier effect in the economy. It is estimated that the investment made with BOT model will double up its own amount (number) in the economical system, and will provide a good source of income for the economy. It seems possible, also, for the government to increase revenue from tax and provide employment. For example, if Turkey goes to a foreign debt, normally while it is possible to take up a long dated loan; because of political and sovereign risks credits are given with short dated loans. However, Turkey is able to get this money with BOT model to provide its own sub case service interest-free and free-of-charge.
Countries’ logistic abilities that are assigned with transportation infrastructure also has monopolistic condition in the area they are located. The most important subject appearing with the monopolistic case is the justice in pricing. Therefore, pricing is creating an important agenda for ICAO (International Civil Aviation Association) for ages. ICAO, as possible as it can be, stipulates airports’ to be fair in pricing. However, ICAO has intensified its attempts for a justified pricing especially on airside part. Namely, in an airport an income to compensate depreciation for airside and establishments’ maintenance, restoration and security expenditure and according to them an acceptable pricing is a fair pricing. In other words, airports must be quoted to contribute society’s commerce and journey abilities instead of pricing them to make profit. From this point of view, giving the chance to all airline companies from big to small countries will be one of the most important appliances for globalization. As airports has the characteristics to be the only in its regional area, as a monopolistic feature, they can easily find clients for all prices. The important thing is how this will be reflected as a cost to society, airline, and tourism sector. ICAO emancipated pricing airport’s landside, like terminal building, roads, parking lot, and other support establishment.
On the other hand, airports under the control of government always bewared pricing landside as they are making a public service.
At the end of 1980’s, the system started in England to privatize airports has accepted airports as a monopolistic and profit centered enterprises instead of government investments for public service. Particularly terminal and landside services became more luxurious than required and the prices became much more expensive than normal. However, the countries like America, Canada which comprehend that the airway traveling is not a luxury; airway services are totally in the boundaries of capacity which citizens and airline administrator afford to buy. Our country has chosen enormous gallant but costly terminal administration which England has the leading role. Because in this system, the terminal operator has maximized the profit and people are convinced that an airline trip is a way of luxury transportation. Consequently;
- Especially, because of DHMİ’s philosophy of selling the citizens’ property to the companies who quoted the highest and fill up its box, architectural projects being told of are prepared costly and flamboyant.
- Prequalification conditions are hold very high or detailed and applicant numbers and varieties are restricted, and a big sum is requested thus the costs of terminal operating are increasing.
- Airline companies are squashed with increasing airport costs, and tourism agents try to dissolve these cost in hotel and voyage packets and a bottle of water costs 5-6$.
- While privatizing the terminal the opinions of airline sector, carriers and tourism agents are not asked.
- Monopolistic terminal operating system, which will be created in near future, will affect airline and tourism associations in a negative way. Contracts done for 15-20 years are chaining the sector like a collar.
- It is a subject of critique to welcome tourists who have 20,000-30,000 $ national income to a country with luxurious and magnificent terminals whose citizens have 6,000-7,000 $ national income, after comparing other countries’ examples of terminals.
- Terminal constructions are finished before the required period to extend the operating duration without paying attention to its quality of construction. However, after the start of using the terminal, because of lack of the quality, malfunctions are encountered. In addition to this, terminal’s being completed than the required time limit creates no profit for the government.
Airport privatization is relatively new to Turkey, but is rapidly becoming the model for airport operations around the world. Depending on the economic and political circumstances, contract management, a long-term franchise for new facilities, a long-term lease, or outright sale can offer benefits to taxpayers and airport users alike.
The appropriate mode of privatization depends on the specifics of each case and must be the subject of careful analysis. Done well, privatization can provide net benefits for all parties by adding value to the airport's operations.
Airlines can receive assurances of cost controls; air travelers can obtain a higher level of service; the airport agency can obtain some new revenues; and the new airport operator a new source of business.
The experience with airport privatization, and with airport facility BOT projects, is too limited to be able to label the concept of privatization a success. In making a decision to privatize an airport, a system of airports, or to implement a single BOT project, governments need to assess probability for success, and be realistic in their aspirations. Other forms of public/private sector partnership can be considered. Commercialization of airports can also be considered rather than privatization, where privatization is not obviously viable, or may not be desirable.
REFERENCES
Sander, C., “Airport Privatization: Trends and Opportunities”, Vice President of Airport Operations Unisys Global Transportation
http://www.unisys.com/transportation/insights/insights__compendium/airport__privatization_c0___part__1.htm Doganis, R.., The Airport Business. London: Routledge, 1992
Kapur, A., Airport Infrastructure The Emerging Role of the Private Sector. World Bank Technical Paper Number 313, The World Bank Washington, D.C. 1995
Tretheway, M., Airport Ownership, Management and Price Regulation. InterVISTAS Consulting Inc. March 2001 s.9
http://www.reviewcta-examenltc.gc.ca/CTAReview/CTAReview/english/reports/trethaway.pdf
Poole Jr., R. W., Guıdelınes For Aırport Prıvatızatıon. RPPI Policy Study, Reason Foundation, October 1994 s.6 http://www.reason.org/htg13.pdf
Topuz, Z. “Yap-İşlet-Devret Modeli ve Terminal İşletmeciliği Uygulamaları” Uçuş Noktası, No.12 (Mart- Nisan 2006):18–20.
2005 Annual Report DHMİ
http://www.dhmi.gov.tr/newenglish/annualreport/2005/projects%202.html