Competition in Sydney Airport Industry Free-Samples for Students

Question: Discuss about theCompetition in Sydney Airport(Monopoly) Industry. Answer: Introduction To understand the competition, a brief discussion, at the theoretical degrees, numerous economic competition aspects amid secondary and primary airports are presented. The actual airports competition and potential efficiency results of competition on the basis of service quality along with pricing from having the secondary airport are further provided (Forsyth 2017). Assessing the roles of competitions as an alternative for monitoring price besides supplementary regulation reforms is also presented. The efficiencies of secondary airports contrasted to the primary ones as well as the potential pitfalls to airport entry as well as competition are provided as well (Forsyth 2017). The airline ratings for quality of service at Sydney airport can be illustrated below: Competition The concept of elasticity is useful in fathoming the drivers of demand for air travel. The elasticities gives the measurement for the demand responsiveness for air travel to alterations in certain variables like income or price. The figure below explains the aeronautical revenue per passenger as well as entire quality of service ratings. The price for business travel remains less sensitive to compared to leisure purposes. The demand or air travel is relatively sensitive to both income and price (Goetz 2017). The demand that a given airline faces hinges on macroeconomic variables and other factors more straight under its control. In the contemporary world, Airline Industry remains the foremost competitive and prominent industries. The industry generates enormous quantities of income and employment. The business travel is on the increase and airlines are presently investing further. The airlines have undergone huge-scale privatization as substantial component of airline used to be owned by government. The Airports have market power and very little can be done to reduce such a power. Airport Parking Profits 2015-2016 can be illustrated below: Airport Profit Margin (%) Profit ($) Sydney 73.1 97.8 Brisbane 66.1 58.8 Melbourne 59.0 79.9 Perth 55.6 35.4 There has been drastic rise in quantity of air service providers due to privatization. Both the Sydney Airport Corporation and Federal Government are being urged to put a stop to the row over the terms to build the 2nd airport amid fears hard negotiations might delay the critical project and creep up its visibility. The chief airports in different cities never compete extremely, with an exception of occasional hub traffic attraction. The main type of active competition among the airports is the competition between secondary and primary airports in Sydney for low-cost carrier traffic. The stable low-cost carriers growth has particularly impacted the airport competition (Hazledine 2017). This takes place by being a catalyst for developing low-cost airports. It further acts by compelling legacy airports such as the ones that serve full-service carriers predominantly to engage in competition on the basis of service and price offerings. Various legacy airports have subsequently lost the historical virtual monopolies thereby motivating corresponding management to construct facilities which shall be increasingly competitive with the low-cost types (Haines 2017). The competition between secondary and primary airports has negative and positive characteristics subject to the various structural and locational variables in the catchment of airport. The rivalry can culminate in better air traffic allocations to airports along with push inefficient airports to improve their performance, thereby leading to enhanced outcomes of price at such airports. Inefficiencies in traffic allocations in certain scenarios emerge from failure by price to reflect costs and where subsidies ensure that secondary airports prices remain artificially stayed low. The market share development of main airports, 2002-2010 is shown below: City Main airport(s) (and distance from city centre) Alternative airport(s) (and distance from city centre) Change main airports' market share 2002-2010 Belfast Belfast International (12km) George Best (5km) -3.2% Paris Charles de Gaulle (25km); Orly (13km) Beauvais-Tille (85km) -2.7% Oslo Gardermoen (35km) Moss, Rygge (60km); Sandefjord, Torp (118km) -8.1% Sydney Airport: performance and potential competition from a second airport Milan Linate (8km); Malpensa (40km) Bergamo (45km) -17.4% Stockholm Arlanda (37km); Bromma (7km) Skavsta (100km); Vasteras (110km) -22.4% The airports within identical catchment compete to appeal to inbound as well as outbound airline traffic on the bases of price and quality of services offerings and via the essential aeronautical services provisions. Airports that share overlying catchment regions provide a more convenient as well as competitive pricing as forms of competition for the outbound traffic (passengers and airlines). Airports which are increasingly approachable via public transport or roads and with extremely non-stop services permit travelers to bypass hubs thereby delivering greater quality in regards to time of travel. Further, airports that appeal to low-cost carriers achieve a sustained competitive advantage in the sense that such can provide lower prices for corresponding flights, catchment area expansions (along with demand) by appealing to passengers who are prices conscious. Inbound (or competition) could as well happen amid airports. It describes the possibility to attract passengers and supplementary users only via surrounding environment attractiveness (the hinterland) or via airport features itself. This takes place among the airports that have a huge inbound traffics share that are usually situated nearby destinations of tourists. The quality offered services determines the airports catchment area size, competition intensity and outbound or inbound demand level. For instance, a small-medium size airport providing domestic/regional flights shall never compete extensively with giant hub airports that offer long-haul global traffic since they provide diverse routes along with catering for diverse types of passengers. The bottom line is that whereas airports directly compete with each other based on service offering and price, the extent and nature of such a rivalry anchors various factors within catchment that determines passenger and airline demand at unique airport. The efficiency as well as pricing with competition in airport can be understood. Whereas it is a normal anticipation that escalated competition would remain beneficial economically, this is untrue in airport market and is reliant on diverse locational and structural features of corresponding airports. Nevertheless, it has been claimed that in case a secondary airport is established and derives traffic from a primary airport (that faces excess demand), its entry will probably culminate in extremely efficient flights allocation to airports within the region. This is probably the Sydney Airport case that has been predicted in the Joint Study to feature excess demand by the year 2035. In Sydney, competition will automatically limit monopoly power of Sydney Airport. This is unhidden where this Airport is subjected to rivalry from additional airports. Its aptitude to establish/set prices, non-airside or airside, is restrained by competitions strength. This is due to the fact 2nd airport entering the industry will be increasingly capable of offering lower-costs than primary airport since it will either be increasingly efficient or supple to the low-cost carriers requirements. The primary airports monopoly status could have implied that they previously evaded the costs minimization or failed to maintain price beyond efficient level; for those airports a scope to decrease entire aeronautical charges level to airlines. For airports lacking such capabilities of reducing prices in the short term, secondary airport rivalry could compel the primary ones to undertake cost review to reduce charges of aeronautical over the medium-longer run and appeal to carriers that are low-cost. It might be that rivalry from secondary airport prompts measures capable of enhancing efficiency at primary airport that had historically permitted costs to increase where it lacked competition (Kumar 2017). The introduction of a 2nd Sydney airport shall establish competition for the Kingsford Smith Airport, however, it remains questionable whether the benefits from adopting a duopoly shall be substantial. The foremost probably scenario will be that Sydney Airport Corporation Limited shall grab the 1st refusal right to construct and run the airport (Seedhouse 2017). Government Controls The airports are subjects to numerous kinds of price regulation as well as monitoring thereby curbing the market power. Effective regulatory regimes are required to bar the probable market power abuse by private monopolies. The chief kings of economic regulation is categorized a cost-oriented encompassing ROI regulation, alongside incentive-oriented regulation including price-cap (was effective in Sydney Airport along with Australian airport till 2002). Economic regulation could be effective in holding aeronautical along with non-aeronautical service charges at acceptable degrees alongside curbing corresponding market power. Conversely, economic regulation has such drawbacks as being ineffective due to imperfect info regulators collect relating to firms dynamic particularly around actual costs (Seedhouse 2017). A strong competition between airports is, therefore, the magic solution/substitute for economic regulation because even in cases where rivalry cannot propel price to marginal costs, airports shall remain increasingly efficient (Xiao et al. 2017). The gained efficiency will outstrip deadweight loss triggered by increased prices in absence of regulation. Substitute The substitutes to primary monopoly Sydney Airport are the cheaper secondary airports. The secondary airports cost are generally lower than primary ones and can effectively compete based on prices. This is where the low-cost carriers remain enticed to utilize secondary airports. Additional variables as congestion absence are essential in enticing traffic to 2nd airport thereby making operation costs of airline less; alongside reduced head-head competition with carriers that offer full service than at the primary airport. Nevertheless, the secondary airports strongest selling point is lower charges (Arblaster 2017). The average airline survey ratings can be as presented below: Conclusion The secondary airports will offer lower accessibility to low-cost carriers since it undertake to supply a service of lower quality. For instance, secondary airports have low-cost terminal whereas primary one has costly and high quality terminal (Adapa and Roy 2017). Where secondary airport terminal operations variable costs are lower, it will be efficient for low-cost carriers appeal to secondary airport, given that it is never prepared to pay for greater quality of service. Bibliography Adapa, S. and Roy, S.K., 2017. Case Study 6: Malaysian Airlines Versus AirAsia: Customer Satisfaction, Service Quality and Service Branding. In Services Marketing Cases in Emerging Markets (pp. 67-75). Springer International Publishing. Arblaster, M., 2017. Regulation in markets facing uncertainty: The case of Australia. Journal of Air Transport Management. Forsyth, P., 2017. Pre-financing airport investments, efficiency and distribution: Do airlines really lose?. Journal of Air Transport Management. Goetz, A.R., 2017. 15. Air transport: speed, global connectivity and timespace convergence. Handbook on Geographies of Technology, p.211. Haines, F., 2017. Regulation and risk. Regulatory Theory: Foundations and applications, p.181. Hazledine, T., 2017. Mixed pricing in monopoly and oligopoly: theory and implications for merger analysis. New Zealand Economic Papers, pp.1-14. Kumar, M., 2017. Law, Statistics, PublicPrivate Partnership and the Emergence of a New Subject. In Accumulation in Post-Colonial Capitalism (pp. 59-74). Springer Singapore. Robins, S.F., 2017. A Better Flight Path: How Ottawa can Cash In on Airports and Benefit Travellers. Seedhouse, E., 2017. Point-to-Point Transportation. In Spaceports Around the World, A Global Growth Industry (pp. 95-100). Springer International Publishing. Xiao, Y.B., Fu, X., Oum, T.H. and Yan, J., 2017. Modeling airport capacity choice with real options. Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, 100, pp.93-114.